Jump to content

Talk:Atom

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 174.117.121.225 (talk) at 21:55, 21 January 2017 (→Create wiki links for "nuclear fission": new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Featured articleAtom is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 9, 2008.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 17, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
February 9, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
February 10, 2008Good article nomineeListed
February 18, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of November 21, 2007.
Current status: Featured article

History

Is this video worth referencing in the article? I thought it might complement the history section section with the visuals http://ed.ted.com/lessons/the-2-400-year-search-for-the-atom-theresa-doud Jcardazzi (talk) 22:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi[reply]

First evidence-based theory

For instance, there are two types of tin oxide: one is 88.1% tin and 11.9% oxygen and the other is 78.7% tin and 21.3% oxygen (tin(II) oxide and tin dioxide respectively). This means that 100g of tin will combine either with 13.5g or 27g of oxygen. 13.5 and 27 form a ratio of 1:2, a ratio of small whole numbers.

This explanation for 100g of tin confused me to expect the quantity of Oxygen to be 11.9g and 21.3g respectively for 11.9% and 21.3% Oxygen. It would be better if it was shown how the value was derived.

Quantity of Tin + Quantity of Oxygen = Quantity of Compound

Quantity of Compound = Quantity of Tin /  % of Tin in that compound * 100

For 100g of tin;
Quantity of tin(II) oxide = 100g ÷ 88.1 × 100
Quantity of tin(II) oxide = 113.50737797956867196367763904654 g


∴ Quantity of Oxygen = 113.5g - 100g
Quantity of Oxygen = 13.5g

Simillary we get
Quantity of tin dioxide = 127.06480304955527318932655654384 g
and Quantity of Oxygen = 127g - 100g
Quantity of Oxygen = 27g

Ajoe.blk (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Matter

There's statement about dark matter in the summary that reads: "Not all the matter of the universe is composed of atoms. Dark matter comprises more of the Universe than matter, and is composed not of atoms, but of particles of a currently unknown type." This gives the impression that dark matter is a real matter while the article about dark matter states that it is hypothetical matter. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.82.5.162 (talk) 22:21, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked the article on matter and the word "matter" itself does not have a rigorous, universally-accepted definition. Until physicists sort out the semantics, "dark matter" can be as real as "ordinary matter".Kurzon (talk) 07:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Tuyisenge Daniel Tuyisenge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.191.5.112 (talk) 18:45, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PM

Someone please define "pm" - picometres in the section about atom size, pm = 1 trillionth of a metre. This is not at all obvious to the average reader. Avoid unexplained tech abbreviations/jargon! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.151.160.219 (talk) 01:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Theoretical

the first section is "history of atomic THEORY", yet nowhere in the opening paragraph does it mention that the atom is theoretical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lymphoid (talk • contribs) 02:29, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-edit queries

I've just changed a few minor things. Question: "Atoms are small enough that classical physics gives noticeably incorrect results." Results on what? Size? Mass? Tony (talk) 10:39, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Atom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brownian motion

Botanist Robert Brown looked observed pollen grains not dust grains.[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.45.221.97 (talk) 15:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:26, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tin Dioxide naming

Under the heading "first evidence-based theory", there is a reference to tin(II) oxide and then a reference to tin dioxide. To comply with standard IUPAC naming conventions, tin dioxide should be shown as tin(IV) oxide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick0927 (talk • contribs) 04:00, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear fission is mentioned a few times in the article. We should create links to the nuclear fission wiki page. 174.117.121.225 (talk) 21:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
  2. ^ BBC Four - Atom, Episode 1: The Clash of the Titans, Jim Al-Khalili, 2007. DVD
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Atom&oldid=761247768"