Category talk:Cosmology

Should general relativity really be a subcategory of cosmology?

I think the answer is probably no. Or else they should be subcategories of each other (I believe this arrangement is allowed for by Wiki software, but I believe this practive is deprecated), on the grounds that most gtr textbooks discuss cosmological models such as the well-known Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker models, and all cosmology textbooks discuss notions from general relativity, including basic concepts but also things like gravitational lensing.

In any event, the reason I have added the category general relativity to some cosmology articles is not at all polemnical. Rather, I have embarked upon a project to improve the gtr articles, so want to keep track of some of these articles and possibly improve some of them. I wish to avoid excessive overlap or insufficient interlinking with the cosmology articles.---CH (talk) 3 July 2005 07:15 (UTC)

4 branches should be 2

There are really only two top level branches of cosmology, physical and metaphysical. The religious and esoteric branches are both subsets of the metaphysics. Are there other editors who would support this reorganization? --Blainster 21:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I definitely support this. We should modify the article cosmology to reflect this as well. --ScienceApologist 23:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)