![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No...
In 1802, Gay-Lussac first formulated the law that a gas expands linearly with a fixed pressure and rising temperature (usually better known as Charles's Law). Maybe "should be better known as Charles's Law" or "In Britain better known as yotta yotta", but I've always heard it called Gay-Lussac's Law. This site is the first time I've heard about it being Charles's law instead. So in that sense I agree with "No."-- T. Anthony 04:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Is the part about illegal drugs vandalism? - 03:20, 26 January 2006 (IP 24.185.212.101)
According to the interwikis, there are two different spellings for his name, which are Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac and Louis Joseph Gay-Lussac. Which one is correct? -- ( talk) 07:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Adding individuals to atheism category may be in violation of several WP rules and guidelines
One source by some Ramesh Chopra in his so called Academic Dictionary Of Philosophy book. When reading the book in Google books he states an opinion that simply mirror or tend to follow other sources WP:DIVERSE. Worts of all he does not have any footnotes or sources that directly indicates if he is just mirroring or asserting it himself WP:YESPOV, WP:CRYSTAL. Categories regarding beliefs or sexual or even orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question WP:BLPCAT.
Statements and claims presented as a fact must be backed by balanced, certified and strong unequivocal research and scholarship with the help of multiple sources. Loose claims here and there are just opinions and does not amount to an fair and balanced view. Varying authors can be be used as a source for presenting an opinion for such and such, but it is still not to be deemed authoritative and conclusive.
Multiple sources and scholarly consensus must be the main aim when something is stated as a reasonable fact. Otherwise we are deceiving.
I have added an image of the pressure-temperature gas law to illustrate one of his main claims to fame. It has been deleted twice and I fail to see why. There is already an image of a hot air balloon which Ga-Lussac used at one point so to say that refs to his scientific work cannot be used is contradicted by the image. 81.153.242.58 ( talk) 14:21, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
But the law is named after him: surely some significance for the reader? 81.153.242.58 ( talk) 07:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No...
In 1802, Gay-Lussac first formulated the law that a gas expands linearly with a fixed pressure and rising temperature (usually better known as Charles's Law). Maybe "should be better known as Charles's Law" or "In Britain better known as yotta yotta", but I've always heard it called Gay-Lussac's Law. This site is the first time I've heard about it being Charles's law instead. So in that sense I agree with "No."-- T. Anthony 04:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
Is the part about illegal drugs vandalism? - 03:20, 26 January 2006 (IP 24.185.212.101)
According to the interwikis, there are two different spellings for his name, which are Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac and Louis Joseph Gay-Lussac. Which one is correct? -- ( talk) 07:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Adding individuals to atheism category may be in violation of several WP rules and guidelines
One source by some Ramesh Chopra in his so called Academic Dictionary Of Philosophy book. When reading the book in Google books he states an opinion that simply mirror or tend to follow other sources WP:DIVERSE. Worts of all he does not have any footnotes or sources that directly indicates if he is just mirroring or asserting it himself WP:YESPOV, WP:CRYSTAL. Categories regarding beliefs or sexual or even orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question WP:BLPCAT.
Statements and claims presented as a fact must be backed by balanced, certified and strong unequivocal research and scholarship with the help of multiple sources. Loose claims here and there are just opinions and does not amount to an fair and balanced view. Varying authors can be be used as a source for presenting an opinion for such and such, but it is still not to be deemed authoritative and conclusive.
Multiple sources and scholarly consensus must be the main aim when something is stated as a reasonable fact. Otherwise we are deceiving.
I have added an image of the pressure-temperature gas law to illustrate one of his main claims to fame. It has been deleted twice and I fail to see why. There is already an image of a hot air balloon which Ga-Lussac used at one point so to say that refs to his scientific work cannot be used is contradicted by the image. 81.153.242.58 ( talk) 14:21, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
But the law is named after him: surely some significance for the reader? 81.153.242.58 ( talk) 07:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)