[WikiEN-l] Nuke [[WP:CITE]] and [[WP:RS]]

[Brian Salter-Duke]

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 01:58:32PM -0500, Phil Sandifer wrote:
> 
> 
> On Jan 25, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Stan Shebs wrote:
> 
> >Phil Sandifer wrote:
> >>I'd be similarly shocked if one could write a good article on high
> >>temperature physics or group theory while being totally dependent on
> >>published reliable sources, because those sources were never written
> >>for the purpose of being used to explain the concept to novices.
> >>
> >The best sources for general topics are textbooks actually; reliable,
> >and written to explain concepts. I find the introductions to  
> >monographs
> >and papers as useful for WP as the bodies; at least the more  
> >articulate
> >writers manage to get in a few words intelligible to the  
> >nonspecialist. :-)
> 
> I picked those examples precisely because there weren't good or  
> usable textbooks for them. (Or, at least, I asked a random chemistry  
> grad student I had nearby for two topics that would fit that bill and  
> that's what she gave me. Damned if I know what the hell group theory  
> is.)

[[Group theory]] is a branch of mathematics. That article has a rather
poor paragraph that points to how chemists us it. To a chemist, Group
Theory is a study of the symmetry of molecules or of crystals. The
latter is used in X-ray crystallography. The former is used in quantum
chemistry and molecular spectroscopy. We do not have an article on it
and we should. There are plenty of fairly simple (2nd year chemistry
undergrad level) books. The most famous is probably "Chemical
applications of Group Theory" by F. Albert Cotton (1963) which lead to
it being taught to undergrads. Plenty of people have tried to improve on
it since but most failed. I may have a go at an article. 

Brian.

> -Phil
> 
> ------------------------------

-- 
          Brian Salter-Duke            b_duke at bigpond.net.au  
               [[User:Bduke]]  mainly on en:Wikipedia.
           Also on fr: Wikipedia, Meta-Wiki and Wikiversity