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

I have updated the entry to include the suggestions made by ITIWBS, including altering the 'Measuring relativ atomic mass' section to make it clear how bombarding a molecule with electrons can be used to form positive ions.

Page Turner:
Entry: Atoms and Isotopes: Pre-university Level - A87762171
Author: mikeyc0312 - U612358
A Flea Market Rescue
Original Entry: A87722012 Atoms and isotopes - A level Standard
Original Author: Nicki - U871201

Good to see you again - I was beginning to worry you'd gone!

<BB<

Kee-rection, technetium is element 43.

http://chemistry.about.com/od/elementfacts/a/technetium.htm

Yo fellas...

There's plenty of stuff in the guide already about atoms, isotopes and ions - some of it could be merely linked to instead of repeating all theory in this Entry. Could make it more concise and to the point... Some of those Entries were written a long time ago, and thoroughly neglected or never noticed by the mainstream - can't blame the masses for a general underappreciation of chemistry and nuclear physics, though

Some of those, for obvious reasons known to me are:

A706844 Ions
A593561 Electron Shells and Orbitals
A593110 The Periodic Table of the Elements (which contains a passage on isotopes)

Cheerio,

Hell

Folks:

A6672963 Atoms and Atomic Structure

Covers most of what is in this Entry... With the same table and all...

I get a feeling that this Entry will need a major rewrite in order to make it more unique.

... maybe that's just me

More 2 pence:

"The atom (PLEASE LINK) is the smallest part of an element that can exist on its own."

Is that true? Would defusing it to "The atom can be thought of the smallest..." make it better?

Can a Uranium atom exist on it's own? (No... It will decay - still it is an atom though...)

"We can see atoms using powerful and modern microscopes (PLEASE LINK)"

We see atoms all the time. Millions of them. Whatever we look at are atoms... What is meant is that "_Individual_ atoms can be visualized directly by using modern powerful microscopes"

"We can’t as yet see inside of an atom but experimental evidence has given us models of an atom. Some are better than others!"

I must disagree. We will never "see" the inside of an atom (as in visually seeing) and the nuclear model is pretty complete. And currently there is only one, quite finished well-understood and generally accepted and agreed upon atomic model.

"3 sub atomic particles called protons, neutrons and electrons."

A proton is not a sub atomic particle if we're strict. It is an ion of hydrogen. An atom - hence it cannot be a sub-atomic particle (but I may be being pedantic)

Sorry - I don't mean to be ripping this Entry apart. I just feel that it would need some overhaul and more careful phrasing...

Cheers,

Hell

I pointed to a few errors in this entry which were not acted up ... even providing a link to a reference. This suggests to me that this entry may not progress much further.

... acted upon

However I do think some of Dr Hells comments are harsh & would not agree with all of them. However it is up to the submitter to make a reasonable response.

Which ones?

See my post #38 as an example. I agree the entry needs to be better integrated with what is already in the guide & I find the language used lacking somewhat in precision which creates errors & an unnecessary vagueness (see my last paragraph of post #36).

Yah... I am sorry if I was not using my silk gloves - It was not my intention to be harsh or personal.

But which argument do you not agree with?

HELL

ps yes ... maybe "seeing" could be replaced with "observing" or "imaging".

A proton is a subatomic particle by definition of sub atomic. A positive hydrogen ion happens to be a bare proton ... a subatomic particle. An atom is not an ion ... an atom has a neutral charge while an ion has a net charge ... an "atom" that has lost or gained electron(s).

An atom is said to be the "smallest" part of an element ... the smallest indivisible part of an element that retains its chemical distinctness ... its chemical properties. Of course an atom is insufficient to express the physical properties of an element,

OK, an ionized atom is still an atom. Ions can be atoms and atoms can be ions. In the case of H+, the proton, the ion is a sub-atomic particle and at the same time an atom... At any rate, we're talking about a very particular case and mostly semantics (since the nomenclature was developed a long time before people figured out the details.

In the passage "smallest part of an element" I was taking objection to the "existing on its own" part... Hence my suggestion to rephrase it as "can be thought of" instead of "is"

That's all I was saying. The following question was an aside... AS: CAN an atom exist on its own? Some yes, some no.

Be happy!

HELL

Gentleman, since leaving the BBC we have kept PR as a calm place for ALL participants.

As the author has not been back, it is likely this Entry will be put back into the Flea Market, where one or both of you could pick up the gauntlet and finish it off.

In the meantime, please take your 'discussion' into your Personal Space, where you may even come up with a collaborative effort.

Thank you.


lil
ACE/Scout.

Peace and Love to you all...

Hell

I knew I should have been a hippy


lil x

Our differences are less than a hair's breadth away so no fuss atoll.

As the author hasn't been on h2g2 since July, I think Lil is right and that he's ed. I'd like to propose a return to the Flea Market.

<BB<

Seconded

lil x