Talk:Cosmology

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Definition too narrow[edit]

From the article: Cosmology (from Greek κόσμος, kosmos "world" and -λογία, -logia "study of") is a branch of astronomy concerned with the studies of the origin and evolution of the universe, from the Big Bang to today and on into the future. It is the scientific study of the origin, evolution, and eventual fate of the universe.

I think this definition is too narrow. Cosmology refers to *any* theory of the Universe, including religious narratives and metaphysical ideas. This definition implies that cosmology is astronomy, and that is not historically true. Rendall (talk) 23:18, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It's a metaphysical field of philosophy that happens to include astronomy. Even in astronomy, there are speculative aspects that appear untestable, and thus are philosophical in nature. Praemonitus (talk) 21:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 January 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 16:10, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Cosmology looks now as an attempt for a WP:broad-concept article. But I do not think that a broad-concept article on this topic is possible. It is definetly fails "expert test": the expert on "cosmology" would need to have both physics and religiom in their knowledge base, along with philosophy. Heanor (talk) 15:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. A "history of cosmology" articles implies a "cosmology" one. Srnec (talk) 03:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I don't follow the nominator's logic. This is an article on cosmology, so what's the problem? "History of cosmology" might be an acceptable spin-off article for some academic study of how beliefs on cosmology have changed over time, but it isn't the current article. SnowFire (talk) 20:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, I see that I was unable to explain what I mean. Then it is better to nominate this article for deletion. Srnec, SnowFire there is no such thing as cosmology. branch of astronomy concerned with the study of the chronology of the universe is called physical cosmology. There are also philosophical cosmology and religious cosmology, they have nothing to do with physical cosmology. Thus WP:broad-concept article is not possible. By history of cosmology I meant of course history of physical cosmology, but from your reaction I understand that it is confusing. --Heanor (talk) 20:44, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thanks. It's clearer now. If that is what you want, though, then that is what you should propose: History of physical cosmology. There is no way we can have a "history of cosmology" article without a "cosmology" article.
There is an Oxford Companion to Cosmology. And it has an article on "Cosmology". It says, "Cosmology may be divided into four disciplines: physical cosmology, metaphysical cosmology, religious cosmology, and esoteric cosmology." It then has sections on each of these four. So a broad-concept article that works as a kind of clearing house for folks who have to google "cosmology" wouldn't be so bad. Although this article isn't that (yet). Srnec (talk) 22:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- I too find the logic flawed. This seems to be more an issue of semantics. It's like saying, "there is no such thing as energy. There is potential energy and there is kinetic energy, but not energy." However, energy is the noun in this example, and "potential" and "kinetic" are just adjectives. Likewise, "cosmology" is the noun in the above statement, and to be a noun it has to be a thing. The adjectives are simply different types of the thing. Like Energy, this article should serve as the "parent article" that broadly lays out the concept, and then breaaks it into its different aspects, and then we should have a subordinate-article (aka: main article) on each of those aspects. In a way, a parent article works like a DAB page only much more informative, except, whereas DABs are for entirely different things that share the same name, parent articles are for the same noun that has many different adjectives. Zaereth (talk) 22:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This article covers what most people searching for "Cosmology" would expect to read about, therefore it's in the right place. PianoDan (talk) 19:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.