Re: Galactic pancake mystery solved

Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
> 1. How do you know the that the model they used was naive?

>From reading the rest of his posts, it seems that he considers all (or
most) of cosmology to be naive and first-order. So it naturally stands
to reason that this simulation should also be naive and first order.

Of course, before any science can progress to second order and less
naive, it must generally pass through a naive and first order phase.
So I applaud the efforts of the researchers in question. I would agree
that the pancake mystery has not been *solved* exactly, but that is the
wording of the reporter, I think, and in any event, the distribution
appears to be less mysterious and troubling than it was at first.

It's been my experience that science as reported in the mainstream
press sounds much more certain and definitive than what is actually
published in the underlying journals. Of course, there are researchers
who perhaps simplify too much in interviews; that might contribute to
that disparity.

> What do you suggest they do? Give up and say this stuff can never be
> understood?

Since it entertains Tim to no end to heckle the efforts of researchers
in cosmology, I should think he would want them to continue. I for one
wouldn't want him to be disappointed.

Brian Tung <brian@xxxxxxx>
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Earth rotation
    ... Two thirds of the Earth is not first order? ... don't even know what 'science' means, so don't be so hard about the ... Will your wigglie finger be made of ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Earth rotation
    ... Two thirds of the Earth is not first order? ... don't even know what 'science' means, so don't be so hard about the ... Will your wigglie finger be made of ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
Loading