|
|
|
|
|
by ceejayoz
500 days ago
|
|
> Not many uninterested laypeople are going to be browsing the IAC website for astrophysics news. But they will get linked to it, or read articles by reporters using it as a source without enough domain knowledge to make the distinction. I, after all, didn't seek this out - it just popped up on the HN home page. > What seems weird to me is to be interested in a discipline, seek out news and conversation about it (from university press releases!) but then reject and/or argue about any terms of art that are established within that discipline. I think science communication, post-COVID, needs to take a serious look at how to better explain things to the public. "Habitable zone" is simply one example of it. |
|
However, I think there's some serious slack to cut when you're viewing an article on the Institute of Astrophysics website, compared to reading Fox/CBS/whatever.
Edit: In my re-reading of the article, I see they define it! I'm no longer sure what all this back and forth is even about. "This orbit places it within the habitable zone of the system, _meaning it is at the right distance from its star to sustain liquid water on its surface_" Do you want them to not use the term even when they define the term?