What is the problem with Reuters' glossary of particle physics terms?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
34 replies · 6K views
The best part of Yahoo Answers is that the person who asked (and hence doesn't know) gets to decide the "CORRECT" answer.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
inflector said:
The best part of Yahoo Answers is that the person who asked (and hence doesn't know) gets to decide the "CORRECT" answer.

Oh now THAT explains a lot... I did not know that. What the **** is Yahoo thinking?! *imagines the vast emptiness of the Yahoo corporate intellect*
 
No yahoo answers is way fun best thing on yahoo honestly.
 
rhody said:
Phrases like: scream high school or college intern to me, combine that with lackadasical review and you get what you see in the article.

How would you define dark energy? That definition seems very good to me.
 
RE:
A mysterious, invisible material that has an anti-gravitational power

I think this is misleading for several reasons:

1) "Mysterious" as a word adds no scientific descriptive value but serves to sensationalize the definition.

2) "Material" implies matter rather than energy.

3) "Anti-gravitational" implies that there is such a thing as anti-gravity.