Talk:Michael Faraday

Notes on Davy's Lectures

A link to Faraday's notes on Humphrey Davy's lectures would be most interesting and informative, indeed, a fine thing to include in this article. Is there a pdf. of Faraday's notes on the internet that could be linked to?

Number of Images

The article definitely now has too many images and has become noisy and unfocussed. Wikipedia is not paper (see Wiki is not paper) and we do not need to illustrate every subject the article tangentially touches on. A wiki allows a reader to access background information at one click , it does not need to be presented in the one article. e.g. Because Faraday built his own voltaic cell as a young man does not mean we need a diagram of a cell. Take a look at Wikipedia featured articles for the level of illustration and focus on its subject expected of good articles on Wikipedia. Especially the articles on scientists Isaac Newton , Johannes Kepler and Edward Teller. Lumos3 (talk) 08:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

So can we remove all the images of Faraday and an irrelevant pciture of a gravestone? Articles on scientists need discussion and illustration of their acientific achievements and not endless discussion of what they ate as a children or where they went on holiday. If readers want this then they can access the original 1911 Britannica article for free. Peterlewis (talk) 12:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

We need to get the balance right and gratuitous images for images sake misleads the reader. Faraday did not discover the ring structure of benzene. A bar magent does not illustate diamagentism.Lumos3 (talk) 09:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

No he didn't, but he did discover the compound which we now represent by the ring formula. So it is not a gratuitous image and doesn't mislead anyone. And Faraday certainly pioneered the use of lines of force which is what the bar magnet shows, and the article says. I would rather delete the picture of his grave and cut the number of pictures of him than lose scientific content. After all, he is famous because of his great discoveries, and his contribution to public life by lectures and investigations. Peterlewis (talk) 09:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The use of an image can make a reader jump to a conclusion unless it is carefully qualified. We need to be careful what images we include and ensure they are part of the description of Faraday's life , not just there to make the page pretty.

The images I think are superfluous are

• Chemistry: Faraday did not discover the ring structure of benzene - this is misleading. Faraday did not understand its ring structure . Illustrating it as such carries the message that he did.
• Chemistry: This is a Hofman voltameter not faradays apparatus - Implies this was the cell Faraday used when this is Hofmans. If you have an illustration of the cell faraday used that would be good
• Diamagnetism: This illustrates ferromagnetism not Diamagnetism . There is no supporting text as to why it is relevant. Need to add detail on Faradays work on magnetic lines. A diagram authored by Faraday on the subject would be good.
• Electricity and magnetism: Why Henry and not Francesco Zantedeschi . Why show images of some scientists and not others . There is implied meaning in giving prominence to an individual. Best to leave out pictures of others unless they are central to Faradays life like Davy. This also goes for William Whewell. There is a case for Maxwell, not sure how close their collaboration was. This needs to be added.
• Electricity and magnetism: Faraday did not invent the Voltaic pile, he merely built one himself .This gives the impression he invented it. Lumos3 (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

My Wikipedia time is very limited, so let me just contribute a few brief lines with some obvious (?) points:

1. Collaboration is at the heart of Wikipedia, or any wiki-based effort.
2. Collaboration nearly always means compromise.
3. Compromise nearly always means that not everyone gets 100% of what he or she wants.
4. This article, like most things on Wikipedia, risks turning into a mess if all the editors aren't willing to compromise.
5. Hyperlinks are an advantage of a web-based encyclopedia over a printed one.

Some very good points are made above by several recent contributors. The question of whether contemporary pictures are appropriate reminds me somewhat of the arguments among musicians as to whether classical music should be played on period instruments or on modern ones. My preference in scientific biographies is for original material (e.g., images) when possible. Is it worth yay/nay votes on some of the recently-added pictures? -- Astrochemist (talk) 02:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I just now located and uploaded a clean, crisp version of the Christmas-lecture image to Wikimedia Commons, and then added it to the Faraday article. I vote "yay" for keeping this version. -- Astrochemist (talk) 03:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Case for images

The case was made already and supported by other editors. If images are to go then remove multiple images of Faraday (one only is needed) and a gravestone. We are now concentrating on his achievements and not peripheral items. If this is to be a serious article then more work is needed on his work and not more social history of the kind shown by many other articles on scientists (which reflect their authorship). Peterlewis (talk) 21:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree with the reasons given by other editors why not all the undoubtedly well-meaning edits of Peterlewis have improved the article. I have removed those diagrams that are irrelevant, incomprehensible or crude. Faraday's achievements are too extensive to be fully explained in one article, just as Einstein's are. However they are all noted here and hypertext links to the fuller explanations are given. That is the value of hypertext. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC).

After thinking on this a few days, I'd like to vote "nay" for Joseph Henry, since he and Faraday never met and apparently had little influence on each other. I'll vote "aye" for a diagram of one of Faraday's most elegant and influential experiments, electromagnetic rotation. - I've just added a little on Faraday's early attempt to find what's now called the Zeeman effect. The section header could use a change. -- Astrochemist (talk) 04:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I have restored the image of Faraday holding a glass bar in place of the image of the bar magnet. I am not sure how the bar magnet directly relates to Faraday's work, he did not invent it or the method of showing its "lines of force " using iron filings. Faraday developed the special optical glass for the glass bars he used himself , a rather boring menial task assigned to him by Davy. It was Faraday's genius that he then used the glass to discover a fundamental physical effect, that magnetism influences the plane of polarisation of light. This image is very appropriate at this point in the text. Lumos3 (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure that he is holding a glass bar? It should be transparent but is clearly not so in the image. It looks like a bar magnet to me. Peterlewis (talk) 06:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Other images which describe it as a glass bar are here: http://www.jamd.com/search?assettype=g&assetid=3330537 and http://www.phy.hr/~dpaar/fizicari/faraday.html. I have revised my view of iron filings according to this ref he was the first to image magnetic force lines in this way see 1830-1835 in http://www.math.yorku.ca/SCS/Gallery/milestone/sec5.html . I think we should use the original Faraday diagram though. Lumos3 (talk) 13:12, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

"Refused a knighthood"? Why?

The entry states that Faraday refused a knighthood. This statement raises more questions than it answers. Does anyone know why he refused a knighthood? Bricology (talk) 05:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

You could read the biographies or try the Reference desk. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The quick response would be his deeply rooted Christian beliefs. According to Geoffrey Cantor on page 101 of his Faraday biography, the 19th century scientist opposed national awards and honors that were tainted by either "hereditary power or gross worldly ambition". This author indicates Faraday turned down a British knighthood, but accepted one from the King of Prussia (Cantor p. 98), and a Chevalier of the Legion d'Honneur from Napoleon III. According to Cantor, Faraday valued awards that were given in honor of achievements that were attained through lifelong service. Cantor captures the essence of Faraday's Sandemanian beliefs on pages 100-101. Most of the original reference material seems to be letters kept in private collections. The notable exception being the letter from Faraday to Lord Wrottesley on 10 March 1854.JamAKiska (talk) 21:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

faraday torch + dup drive(could be source to unlimeted self renewalbe energy)

recently through my maths teacher i found out about a project called the DUP DRIVE. i had an idea of fusing this project with the dup drive which in theory would create self renewing energy

but i cant find much about the dup drive. please if ANYopne knows anymore about the drive please post here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.72.214 (talk) 13:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

vandalism

Seems someone had some fun. Gonna try and put an earlier version back. Robin.lemstra (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Someone beat me to it, I'm kinda new at this, should this article now be locked? Seems several of these edits were made recently, so it's not an isolated incident. Robin.lemstra (talk) 14:59, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Electrochemistry

I have put the pic of Faraday and Daniell back into the header: it is too important to be dropped. Peterlewis (talk) 22:35, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

micheal faraday

micheal faraday is rlated to the WIDDAS' AND NOW AFEW ISHERWOODS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.157.12 (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)