Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 57: |
Line 57: |
| | | |
| Zetfr 23:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC) | | Zetfr 23:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC) |
− | :Interesting to see which order they are listed in size and knowledge... Maybe an extra table in a trivia section... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:36, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− | ::I have now added that in a [[1991: Research Areas by Size and Countedness#Table with coordinates|trivia]] section. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:53, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
| | | |
| 'Microbiology studies microscopic (too small to see) organisms, of which some 1,400 are known and "estimates for the total number of microbial species vary wildly, from as low as 120,000 to tens of millions and higher", according to Nature magazine' What is the 1,400? The other numbers here look reasonable, but this one throws me for a loop. Gene Wirchenko genew@@telus.net [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.220|108.162.216.220]] 05:25, 10 May 2018 (UTC) | | 'Microbiology studies microscopic (too small to see) organisms, of which some 1,400 are known and "estimates for the total number of microbial species vary wildly, from as low as 120,000 to tens of millions and higher", according to Nature magazine' What is the 1,400? The other numbers here look reasonable, but this one throws me for a loop. Gene Wirchenko genew@@telus.net [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.220|108.162.216.220]] 05:25, 10 May 2018 (UTC) |
Line 65: |
Line 63: |
| There is (another) spelling error: mammology instead of mammalogy | | There is (another) spelling error: mammology instead of mammalogy |
| [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.76|172.68.110.76]] 09:48, 10 May 2018 (UTC) | | [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.76|172.68.110.76]] 09:48, 10 May 2018 (UTC) |
− |
| |
− | Regarding the spelling of "mammology" - do you think it was intentional and Randall meant ''mammo-'' female breast ''-logy'' the study of?
| |
− | [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mammo-#English mammo- prefix on wiktionary]
| |
− | --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.46|108.162.216.46]] 21:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− | The size is slightly larger than that of Presidents, and I don't know any women whose breasts are larger than a President. Although the term is preceeded by the word "marine", so we're not talking about humans. Maybe female blue whales have breasts that are larger than the size of an entire human. (That could be of interest to the porn industry.)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.59.4|162.158.59.4]] 00:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | The explanation about railway engineering is incorrect. Whereas every railway has ''a'' standard gauge, "standard-gauge rail" has a specific meaning of a track with rails 1435mm (4 ft 8.5 in) apart. Anything narrower than that is described as a narrow-gauge line by rail technicians and enthusiasts, even if it is the standard gauge for a particular rail network. Where I live in New Zealand, for example, the country's standard gauge of 3 ft 6 in means that the country's rail network uses a narrow-gauge track. I've amended the text accordingly. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]] ([[User talk:Grutness|talk]]) 02:58, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I think the title text is actually a reference to [[wikipedia:Combinatorics|combinatorics]], which is a subfield of mathematics. --cajsq0228 20:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I really wonder where History a la [[1979: History]] would be - I'm honestly surprised he didn't include it in this graph... (?) I think I'd personally try to place it somewhere between right above Black Hole and off the right side of the chart (95%-120% | 20%) -- [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 19:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I'm sorry, but someone has to say this - as I understand, science is based on empirical evidence. Empirically, we have a very good idea of the number of deities; that number is zero. Theology should be in the far top-right corner. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.63|172.71.242.63]] 14:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
| |