{"id":616,"date":"2011-03-28T14:15:18","date_gmt":"2011-03-28T21:15:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/?p=616"},"modified":"2018-08-05T14:35:04","modified_gmt":"2018-08-05T21:35:04","slug":"cosmology-glossaries-compared","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/glossary\/cosmology-glossaries-compared\/","title":{"rendered":"Top Ten Cosmology Principles Glossaries Compared"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here’s a guide to the best available Glossaries of Cosmological Principles. Some are online, others are only available in book form. Glossaries are vital to every scientific subject because without clear, unambiguous definitions, there can be no agreement on what is discussed.<\/strong><\/p>\n

“Cosmology Key Terms”, 1999, University of Virginia<\/a><\/p>\n

Very good online glossary, roughly 350 entries, coherently written at a Scientific American reading level and concise. It strictly focuses on cosmology principles, dodging temptations to include references to people or equipment. It laudably avoids excessive or gratuitous math and obscure language.<\/p>\n

Up to Date? : Even though last updated in 1999 it remains reliable, except for its missing entries.<\/p>\n

Missing: There are no entries for LCDM<\/a>, space<\/a>, Malmquist bias<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>, or \u201cRelativistic Doppler<\/a>.\u201d For large scale structure it includes Voids<\/a>, but not Bubbles, Blobs, Filaments, or Walls though these were established years before the last update.<\/p>\n

Big Bang Bias? : There is no clear Big Bang<\/a> bias, however it is almost completely silent on cosmology principles other than Big Bang<\/a> \/ Expansion based ideas. It properly has an entry for “Big Bang<\/a> model” and none for “Big Bang theory.” There is no entry for any species of a Static Universe<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, there is an unbiased entry for Steady-State model<\/a> and it does describe three different Redshift mechanisms rather than the usual one.<\/p>\n

References: It has some embedded web links to itself (internal references) but there are no links to outside references.<\/p>\n

Errors: The single error I found is describing a model<\/a> as a hypothesis<\/a>. Except in rare cases, a model is never as strong as a scientific hypothesis because while a hypothesis<\/a> is required to be unambiguous models<\/a> almost always have many ambiguous (typically undisclosed) assumptions and adjustable terms.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Glossary of Physical Cosmology Principles (2016) at CosmologyScience.com<\/a><\/p>\n

(Disclosure – this is my own glossary! so I may have just a tiny conflict of interest :-)<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, this is likely the most up to date, complete and accurate Glossary of Cosmology principles from a physics point of view. Its 15,000+ words (which seems to make it the largest Cosmology Glossary reviewed here) in some 150 entries focused on cosmology principles, are written at a Scientific American reading level. It is rare because it presents all the best evidence and reasoning from both sides of the Big Bang controversy<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Up to Date? : Updated monthly, or immediately if an error is found.<\/p>\n

Missing ? : It includes entries for LCDM<\/a>, Static Universe<\/a>, space<\/a>, Malmquist bias<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>, and \u201cRelativistic Doppler<\/a>.\u201d It includes large scale structure entries for Voids<\/a>, Bubbles, and Filaments<\/a>, and new in 2012: Blobs and Walls.<\/p>\n

Big Bang Bias? : No. It includes the best evidence and rationale for all sides of the Big Bang controversy. It properly has an entry for “Big Bang” and not “Big Bang theory<\/span>.” It includes entries for Steady-State models (both types)<\/a>, Static Universes (both types)<\/a>, and Plasma Models.<\/p>\n

References: It is abundantly referenced with external and internal web links.<\/p>\n

Extra: It is unusual in including the html code to allow easy linking to major entries for cosmology papers, articles or websites. It provides entries for common logical fallacies and cognitive biases found in cosmology discourse.<\/p>\n

Errors : Errors are corrected within 24 hours.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

“Origins” by Lightman and Brawer, 1990 (Glossary is in book)<\/a><\/p>\n

This is a very good glossary on cosmological principles (though not available online). It has more entries than the CosmologyScience.com<\/a> glossary, (31 pages) and even though it was written in 1990 – it is still very good (e.g. it includes the new, at that time, large-structure concepts: Voids<\/a>, bubbles and blobs). It is written at an astrophysics level a bit higher than Scientific American, but it is clear and does not employ an avalanche of equations.<\/p>\n

It reveals a mild<\/span> Big Bang bias and has a few errors but still is very credible. (For example it confuses the Steady-State model<\/a> with Static Universe<\/a>, claiming that Steady-State “does not change in time” – when Steady-State is an expanding universe model<\/a> just like Big Bang<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

It properly has an entry for “Big Bang model” and none for “Big Bang theory,” though it has no Static Universe<\/a>, space<\/a>, Malmquist bias<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>, or “Relativistic Doppler<\/a>” entries.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Big Bang (3rd Ed., 2001), by Joseph Silk (Glossary is in book)<\/a><\/p>\n

This is a good glossary on cosmological principles a\u00a0. Last updated in 2001, it has more entries than the CosmologyScience.com<\/a> glossary, (24 pages), but significantly fewer than the Origins book. It is mostly written at a Scientific American level, but some explanations are in post-grad astrophysics language, and it employs more than a few non-trivial equations.<\/p>\n

Up to Date : Last updated in 2001<\/p>\n

Missing : Missing many important concepts including most large-scale structure entries (which were established a decade before this 3rd version was released) including Voids<\/a>, Bubbles, or Filaments<\/a>. It also has no entries for space<\/a>, Malmquist bias<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>,or Relativistic Doppler<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Big Bang Bias? : Strong Big Bang bias by opinions added to discredit ideas competing with Big Bang. It improperly has an entry for “Big bang theory” – when there is no such thing in astrophysics<\/a>, and has no entry for Static Universe<\/a>.<\/p>\n

References : The book containing the Glossary lists 4 pages of reference books and articles distinguished by degree of background needed e.g. \u201cNon-Mathematical.\u201d<\/p>\n

Extra : It has a puzzling large number of references that are not clearly cosmology principles, e.g. star phenomena and meteorites.<\/p>\n

In spite of these drawbacks, for the entries it is a useful cosmology principles glossary, though with any cosmology reference I always need at least a second source before I feel comfortable that a claim is credible.<\/p>\n

Just to be clear – this is not a review of the book (which is excellent) – just its glossary.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Inflationary Universe, Guth, 1997 (Glossary is in book)<\/a><\/p>\n

20 page Cosmology glossary with a particle physics slant understandably focusing on principles related to Inflation. It does provide what I presume are the best available definitions of several different Inflation conjectures.<\/p>\n

Up to Date? Last updated in 1997, a bit old as you will see by all the terms that are missing.<\/p>\n

Missing terms: Big Bang<\/a> (and it constantly uses the wrong and misleading term “Big Bang Theory”), LCDM<\/a>, space<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>, and\u00a0Static Universe<\/a>. It is missing definitions for Walls, Voids<\/a>, Bubbles, and Filaments<\/a> even though these were firmly established a decade before this glossary was written.<\/p>\n

It also has no entries for Malmquist bias<\/a>, or Relativistic Doppler<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Big Bang Bias? Essentially complete Big Bang bias, though it does mention and define Steady-state.<\/p>\n

Errors: Constant misuse of the term \u201ctheory,\u201d as though it means the same as \u201cconjecture\u201d or \u201cmodel.\u201d<\/p>\n

I can recommend this glossary only for its explanations of Inflation related topics.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

UCLA Physics and Astronomy Dept Glossary, 2010<\/a><\/p>\n

Short glossary (~2,000 words) with curt, mostly post-graduate astrophysics level explanations. It includes a good set of quantitative units and a few (not too many) formulas with a moderate Big Bang bias.<\/p>\n

It properly has a \u201c[Hot] Big Bang\u201d entry and never refers to a Big Bang \u201ctheory,\u201d but has no large scale structure entries — Voids<\/a>, Walls, Filaments<\/a>, and Bubbles are absent even though these were firmly established two decades before this glossary was last updated.<\/p>\n

There are no entries for LCDM<\/a>, space<\/a>, Static Universe<\/a>, Malmquist bias<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>, or \u201cRelativistic Doppler<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

It has a widely varying level of explanations: from the elementary — \u201cGamma Ray: a very high energy photon, more energetic than an X-ray\u201d to the exceedingly intricate entry for \u201cFine structure constant.\u201d<\/p>\n

This glossary is probably most useful for its set of quantitative units and formulas.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u201cBig Bang\u201d by Simon Singh, 2004 (glossary is in book)<\/a><\/p>\n

Nine page glossary in the book \u201cBig Bang\u201d with a faint particle physics slant (not available online).<\/p>\n

Up to Date? Last updated in 2004, and even older than that by all the terms that are missing.<\/p>\n

Uses Big Bang \u201cmodel\u201d correctly; not the wrong and misleading term “Big Bang Theory”.<\/p>\n

Missing terms:\u00a0LCDM<\/a>, space<\/a>, Static Universe<\/a>, Malmquist bias<\/a>, Foreground radiation<\/a>, and \u201cRelativistic Doppler<\/a>\u201d. It is also missing definitions for Voids<\/a>, Walls, Filaments<\/a>, and Bubbles even though these were firmly established many years before this glossary was written.<\/p>\n

Big Bang Bias? Essentially complete Big Bang bias (\u201cThe Big Bang Model was proven to be true!\u201d – which is\u00a0 also a failure to understand\u00a0 the basis of science), though it does describe the Steady-state model well.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory<\/a><\/p>\n

Astrophysics online glossary, only 20 or so entries, barely touches on cosmology principles, mostly focused on particle physics. However, it does describe some astrophysics particle physics interactions that are not in any other glossary (e.g. Carbon-Nitrogen-Oxygen Cycle<\/a>).<\/p>\n

It is coherently and concisely written at a Scientific American reading level.<\/p>\n

Up to Date? : Last updated in 2000.<\/p>\n

Missing: There are no entries for LCDM, Space, Malmquist bias, Foreground radiation, \u201cRelativistic Doppler\u201d or large scale structure even though these were established years before the last update.<\/p>\n

There is no clear Big Bang bias, there is not even an entry for Big Bang nor any other model e.g. Static Universe.<\/p>\n

References: It has some embedded web links to itself (internal references) but there are no links to outside references.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

A Glossary for Aspiring Cosmologists<\/a><\/p>\n

    This describes a few scientific principles, however it is more of a guide to the tools (e.g. satellites, projects, equipment and laboratories). It does include some good explanations of polarization, and adds a nice dash of good humor :-)<\/ol>\n

    Western Washington University Cosmology Glossary<\/a><\/p>\n

      Good, but far too brief. Entire glossary fits on one page.<\/ol>\n

      NASA Cosmology Glossary<\/a><\/p>\n

        Fair, but far too brief.<\/ol>\n

        Glossary Specific to Cosmic Microwave Research, NASA<\/a><\/p>\n

        Not a general Cosmology Principles Glossary. Very good for the narrow focus and terms it does include, as noted only those Specific to Cosmic Microwave Research.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

        (Let me invite you to nominate other glossaries that deal with Cosmology. Lets see some good competition.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        Here’s a guide to the best available Glossaries of Cosmological Principles. Some are online, others are only available in book form. Glossaries are vital to every scientific subject because without clear, unambiguous definitions, there can be no agreement on what … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":1069,"menu_order":2,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"iawp_total_views":8,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"class_list":["post-616","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/616","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=616"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/616\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7509,"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/616\/revisions\/7509"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1069"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cosmologyscience.com\/cosblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=616"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}