Talk:Big Bang
(Difference between revisions)
(Use of "theory" in the article) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I reverted to the previous version because the information about the early universe was simply a duplicate of material later in the same article. [[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 20:32, 14 December 2006 (CST) | I reverted to the previous version because the information about the early universe was simply a duplicate of material later in the same article. [[User:Kazim|Kazim]] 20:32, 14 December 2006 (CST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | The word "theory" seems to be used laxly throughout the article. I have the concern of conflating the colloquialism with the scientific meaning. It is however difficult to avoid given the limited diction available for "plausible but unsupported explanation"--[[User:Zurahn|Zurahn]] 21:50, 17 June 2009 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 21:50, 17 June 2009
I reverted to the previous version because the information about the early universe was simply a duplicate of material later in the same article. Kazim 20:32, 14 December 2006 (CST)
The word "theory" seems to be used laxly throughout the article. I have the concern of conflating the colloquialism with the scientific meaning. It is however difficult to avoid given the limited diction available for "plausible but unsupported explanation"--Zurahn 21:50, 17 June 2009 (CDT)
