h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Atoms and Atomic Structure - A5400235
Author: radioactiveBigAl1 - Keeper of mnemonics. Saboteur of boring and banal conversation. On a different planet - thank Heavens! - U723247

This was originally written by Ugi (at A718120), who has since 'left the house'. I have frequently needed to have linked to an EG Entry on 'Atoms' and so decided to polish this for submission to PR.
I left a message on Ugi's PS to ask if he minded, but he hasn't posted for a year.

Enjoy!

(In keeping with something I read somwhere on one of the hootoo forums wonders whether, seeing as I've written more than 90% of this, whether I should claim it for myself?)

When I was making 'links' I was shocked to discover that there isn't an EG Biography of Einstein!

You've got some very oddly nested tags in there Al - some paragraph tags aren't closed, and then two closing tags appear further down the entry.

I think I've sorted that now. (Some of it was a legacy of Ugi, who used lower case paragraph tafgs and line break tags which, hitherto, I hadn't thought would work)

Right above the 'Rutherford-Bohr Model' subheader there's an errant full stop is which outside the paragraph tag.

Hah! Caught that (It's one of my most common typos

Reckon I'll leave other, more scientifically-mided types to deal with the content.

I can only say ... for a job well-done!

- JD

I think this is an excellent entry, but it's a bit big. How about making it one of the first University projects?

This is a good entry, but I think the poem is out of place in it. It is not really understandable unless you know everything in the entry plus a lot more. I'd be happier if you removed it.

I've only had a quick glance through this, but one thing I noticed was "nearly 2000 years, until the so-called 'golden age of Arabic Science' in the 8th-11th Centuries". Aristotle lived in the 4th century BC, so even from there to the 11th century AD was only 14 centuries or 1400. This is a lot less than "nearly 2000". I'd say "more than a thousand years".

There are lots of spelling mistakes in this, which I'll point out if I get time, but it would be good to put it through a spelling checker.

'nearly 2000 years changed to 'over 1000 years.

'think the poem is out of place in it. It is not really understandable unless you know everything in the entry plus a lot more. I'd be happier if you removed it'.

It's not out of place 'coz it's to do with atomic structure.
I don't think there's no harm in indicating that the structure of the atom is a lot more complicated than is actually detailed in the Entry, which is what the poem does.

'There are lots of spelling mistakes in this'. Hmm, I'd say this is a gross exaggeration, but I will run it through a spell checker.

Writing an entry on a subject doesn't mean collecting everything you know about the subject and bunging it in. The entry should have structure, from a gentle introduction through a complete exploration of the topic. You've done this very nicely, but then suddenly the reader comes across an incomprehensible poem at the end, which is totally out of character with the rest of the entry.

' think this is an excellent entry, but it's a bit big'.

Hmm, have a look at some of Farlander's Entries

'How about making it one of the first University projects?' Well, I hadn't rewally thought of that, but there are already Entries in the EG, particularly by Dr. Hell, on e.h. electronic structure' and 'spectroscopy', which is where a E.P. would go if we were to build it up.

I'm not sure if it's valid to package these all up together retrospectively?

I liked this. nice and clear.

'There are lots of spelling mistakes in this, which I'll point out if I get time, but it would be good to put it through a spelling checker'.
Well you have better eyesight that my spel chequer, Gnomon.

I've run it through the SC. and found:

1 spelling error (particals > particles.

One lower case letter instead of a capital.

One missing full stop.

(Numerous examples where it tried to change an 's' to a z' e.g realised > realized, which I ignored)

Hmph. I tend to think longer articles are better for complicated subjects, as long as they aren't getting redundant or too hard to follow (a very subjective thing, I'll grant you). I dunno, it's on a case-by-case basis for me I guess, and this one didn't bore me at all. Also, I quite like the idea of having poems or at least something anecdotal or metaphorical or otherwise non-encyclopedic thrown in - gives the Guide a little more character, in my opinion. 'course, whether it's good character or bad character is entirely a matter of opinion, and since I've just expressed mine, I'll shut up now.

- JD

Well, I've just added a few more footnotes and one link to help explain some of the extra terminolgy used in the poem.

I'm ashamed at myself for missing out on a golden pun opportunity. I should have said that the entry didn't Bohr me one bit.

- JD

Don't get all grumbly about it, BigAl! OK, there weren't as many as I thought.

Content:

Footnote 9 seems to be just repeating something you've already explained elsewhere in the entry.


Spelling mistakes:

invisible articles --> invisible particles
deflected the rays by van amount --> deflected the rays by an amount
"spinning" around it's own axis --> "spinning" around its own axis


Punctuation:

Add full stop after: broken down into by chemical reactions
Add full stop after: written about 60BC

produce 'compound atoms, later to be known --> produce 'compound atoms', later to be known

the masses of all atoms were whole-numbers --> the masses of all atoms were whole numbers

a beam (which he termed a 'cathode ray' was attracted --> a beam (which he termed a 'cathode ray') was attracted

Remove extra comma after: like a plum pudding,,

Remove the comma in: which was given the symbol, Z

Insert space after number in: Z is now known as the atomic numberand

micro-metre-sized --> micrometre-sized

still remained however - Why do these electrons -->
still remained however - why do these electrons






Choice of words:

The ray (particles), was negatively charged

This would be better as:

The particles in the ray were negatively charged

Incredible as though it might seem to us now --> Incredible though it might seem to us now

Remove the quote/apostrophe in: in the Entry 'Electron Shells and Orbitals

From the fore-going --> From the foregoing

Refers to the fact that model of nuclear fission --> Refers to the fact that the model of nuclear fission




h2g2 Style:

- don't use full stops for abbreviations:

e.g. --> eg
J.J. Thomson --> JJ Thomson
i.e. --> ie

- Use 'single quotes' instead of "double quotes":

the "sun" --> the 'sun'
the "planets" --> the 'planets'
and a few other places

- don't use an apostrophe when showing a decade:

1820's --> 1820s

- date format:

7th October, 1985 --> 7 October, 1985