CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics

Wikimedia list article

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 18, 2026
Entity authorityQ131735709
Source-derived summary

Each entry on this list of common misconceptions is worded as a correction; the misconceptions themselves are implied rather than stated. These entries are concise summaries; the main subject articles can be consulted for more detail.

Astronomy and spaceflight

There is no scientific evidence that the motion of stars, planets, and other celestial bodies influences the fates of humans, and astrology has repeatedly been shown to have no explanatory power in predicting future events.

Astronauts in orbit have the sensation of being weightless because they are in free fall around the Earth, not because they are so far away from the Earth that its gravitational pull is negligible. For example, on the International Space Station the Earth's gravity is nearly 90% as strong as at the surface. Objects orbiting in space would not remain in orbit if not for the gravitational force, and gravitational fields extend infinitely, though the strength of the gravitational force is attenuated with distance. There is no limit to the distance across which two objects exert gravitational forces upon one another.

The dark side of the Moon receives about the same amount of light from the Sun as the near side. Since the same side of the Moon always faces the Earth due to tidal locking, the far side had not been seen until Luna 3 photographed it in 1959. Hence, "dark" refers to the far side being unseen from Earth, not to any lack of illumination by the Sun.

Editorial summary

“List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics” enters the record as wikimedia list article. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what List, common and misconceptions can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1959—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around List, common and misconceptions.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, List, common and misconceptions provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 18, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q131735709. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1959.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics primary sources, List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics archive and List research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from List of common misconceptions about science, technology, and mathematics” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.