Back
to top
Is it true that we know more about space than our oceans?
Watch this threadPage 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Coral9
Badges:
3
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
username4449440
Badges:
21
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Kogomogo
Badges:
18
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report
#3
How can we actually answer that if we don't know everything about either? There may be hardly anything left to know about our oceans for all we know and loads of unknown phenomena in space, or vice versa.
0
reply
goggleyed
Badges:
19
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
username5173262
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
15Characters...
Badges:
16
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report
#6
How does one measure the amount of human knowledge about a particular field? You might attempt to quantify knowledge in terms of e.g. number of books written about the field. But these measures may not necessarily be useful - books can just repeat knowledge expressed elsewhere, they can consist of mindless waffle/speculation/be plain wrong, and publishing decisions can be skewed by e.g. public and commercial interest in a field. This is just one example of a metric you might use to try to measure knowledge, but I think most other attempts at quantification will suffer similar questions.
And do you actually care about total knowledge, or are you more interested in the amount of intellectual resources (researcher or teacher time for example) invested in each field in a given time period? This may give you an idea of current research or educational activity in each field, but not total integrated knowledge, and may not give a good estimate of the rate at which new knowledge is being acquired because research can be unproductive or duplicative.
And do you actually care about total knowledge, or are you more interested in the amount of intellectual resources (researcher or teacher time for example) invested in each field in a given time period? This may give you an idea of current research or educational activity in each field, but not total integrated knowledge, and may not give a good estimate of the rate at which new knowledge is being acquired because research can be unproductive or duplicative.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
