Talk:Atomic Age

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject History (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Technology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

The last sentence seems non-NPOV. "Had become clear" makes it sound as if it was clear to everyone, rather than controversial among not only the broad public but also experts in the field. Michael Hardy 00:39 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)

Introduction[edit]

just a formal one: The first detonation of an atomic bomb was not little boy on hiroshima, but trinity (manhattan project) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.77.86.34 (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The second paragraph is emotive and really doesn't seem appropriate for an encyclopaedia. A glance at the author's user page suggests he has an anti-nuclear stance so I suspect there's bias at work here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.8.163 (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

History section should be updated[edit]

History section should be updated with Fukushima disaster instead of just saying 1990-present! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.70.49.30 (talk) 00:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Broken Link[edit]

The external link is broken.

Cheap as water?[edit]

How can the cost of electricity be compared to the cost of water? Generalmiaow 17:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether or not it *can be*; it only matters that it *was*. Verifiability, not truth. Vashti 10:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Indeed! But I have a feeling this is neither... nor, in fact, could it be possible even if it were true. --Generalmiaow 21:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Certainly the cost of electricity can be compared to the cost of water, the relevant unit would be cost per unit time. In other words, the annual cost for the average household or business for these commodities. The consumer doesn't really care whether the commodity is measured in liters or kilowatt-hours, he just wants to know how big the check he has to write will be. I do recall older filmstrips back in elementary school claiming that atomic power would make power so cheap that it wouldn't have to be metered- though I don't recall the actual comparison to water being made. —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 04:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
It is very very easy to make water cost money in countries you know.--Jakezing (Your King (talk) 18:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Atomic Age and Paradigm Shift[edit]

I think the "Atomic Age" is kind of thought of as being the societal interpretation of the fundamental change in the popular conception of the world as Newtonian physics was replaced by Einsteinian physics and actually accepted by society at large. This could add something to the article, I think, but I need help finding a reference. Theshibboleth (talk) 07:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


1940s?[edit]

Why does the "Atomic Age" start in the 1950s by this account? Surely they talked about it as such in 1945. Also, the article seems unclear on whether it is about the phrase/concept or if it is trying to be a thumbnail sketch of atomic energy. --140.247.242.83 (talk) 19:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Looking at The "Atomic Age", nobody refers to the 40's as a part of it, we still had some BS ideas about ?Atomic power, but it wasn't until the 50's that it became, widespread and important, and funny--Jakezing (Your King (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
The term was coined in the 40s by William L. Laurence after the bombings. Not sure when its use became widespread. --Mcorazao (talk) 03:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Nuclear optimism[edit]

FYI: I recently created an article called Nuclear optimism which is related to this one. Please feel free to offer commentary if you are interested ...

--Mcorazao (talk) 03:26, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Information Age which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 08:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Fukushima accident[edit]

I'm removing the mention of the Fukushima accident because:

  • Looking at the initial post ([1]) it was a childish attempt at a political statement
  • It is still not relevant to the subject.

I would consider relevant a reference to someone analysing how this will affect the development of future power plants, but just a mention of the accident is not.--Yitscar (talk) 08:35, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I concur. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 08:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)