My cluster was split into a more simplistic two branches: pro and con. While many clusters stand more effective with a wider representation of groups, this controversy lacks a strict identity on both sides due to how recent it is. It is important to understand that many astronomers will not take a side until more research and review is made. Within the pro side, there is a branch to the astronomer who introduced the new idea and some of the reasoning behind it. The con side lacks an groups in particular, but merely states many of the reasons for why the community is skeptical. Overall the cluster is simple, but in turn more effective.
Reflection
After looking at the clusters of two of my peers (
here and
here), I found that my cluster was significantly less complex. It is possible that I tried to make mine too simple (as heavier scietific topics can be hard to follow), but I do believe that it was still effective. Rather than a controversy between specific people, it is more of a debate between ideas that is still forming an identity. As time passes, I am sure the cluster will continue to form more branches.
No comments:
Post a Comment