Solving Confusing Text in Wiki Friedmann Article

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the Friedmann equations as presented in a Wikipedia article, specifically addressing perceived misleading information regarding the sign of Ω0,k in relation to the curvature of the universe. Participants explore the implications of this confusion and suggest ways to address it, including editing the article or utilizing the talk page for clarification.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant identifies a misleading aspect of the Wikipedia article, claiming that the sign of Ω0,k is incorrectly presented in relation to the curvature of the universe.
  • Another participant suggests using the article's talk page to address the confusion, indicating that previous discussions may already cover similar issues.
  • A third participant expresses agreement with the suggestion to utilize the talk page for clarification.
  • Some participants advocate for direct editing of the Wikipedia article, emphasizing the value of Wikipedia as a resource while acknowledging the need for accuracy.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about how to properly edit the article, particularly regarding the use of Greek letters and subscripts, and indicates reliance on others to make the necessary corrections.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to address the misleading information in the article, but there is no consensus on the best method to do so, with differing opinions on whether to edit directly or use the talk page.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of confidence in their ability to edit the article, with some noting a lack of familiarity with the editing process on Wikipedia.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the Friedmann equations, Wikipedia editing practices, or those seeking clarification on cosmological concepts may find this discussion relevant.

Buzz Bloom
Gold Member
Messages
2,517
Reaction score
465
From time to time I come across some text in a Wikipedia article that is quite misleading to a naive reader. The following is an example:
Wiki Friedmann Eq.png

The problem is that the sign of Ω0,k is backwards. That is the sign is positive for a universe with negative (hyperbolic) curvature, and negative for a universe with positive (hyperspherical) curvature. In particular, the variable k was previously introduced with a description that k=+1 corresponds to positive curvature, and k=-1 corresponds to negative curvature.

I am hopeful that some knowledgeable PFs participant will edit the article to make this clear to a naive reader. There are several reasons why I do not feel competent to do this myself.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could also post in the wiki article "talk" page about your confusion and the folks who wrote / edited that article can fix it. I think that would be more effective and faster means to bring it to their attention.

edit: I looked at the talk page and saw that there is a lot of discussion already on this article. If you read through it you might find someone has brought up the same issues as you and if not then its your turn.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Buzz Bloom
Hi jedishrfu:

Thanks for your post. I think your suggestion is a good idea.

Regards,
Buzz
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
You can also edit yourself. I value wiki as a free first source that always must checked against other sources, sometimes those listed within wiki are good. If you find it useful, you can add to it.
 
PAllen said:
You can also edit yourself.
Hi Paul:

Actually I don't know how to create the notations for Greek letters and subscripts in Wikipedia. I entered a description of what has to be fixed on the talk page, and I hope someone will fix it.

Regards,
Buzz
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
7K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K