Talk:Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 December 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in his book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein, Gerald Holton argues that philosophy from Either/Or influenced Niels Bohr's concept of complementarity?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/December. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought.

Wikipedia

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

‹See TfM›

Physics: Relativity / Publications / History Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the relativity task force.
	This article is supported by Publications Taskforce.
	This article is supported by History Taskforce.

History of Science Low‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Amkgp (talk) 12:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that, according to the book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought by Gerald Holton, the book Either/Or played a major role in the development of the complementarity principle of quantum mechanics? Source: "Holton must be the first man to establish a substantial and convincing link between the principles of quantum theory and the philosophical ideas of Soren Kierkegaard- showing an unchallengeable connection between Kierkegaard's Either/Or and Bohr's doctrine of complementarity." (review by Stephen Toulmin in Physics Today)

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/La Cloche Provincial Park
Comment: Am willing to provide ALTs as needed.

Created by Footlessmouse (talk). Self-nominated at 00:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Interesting book, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. - The hook would be great for me, but I'm afraid that our "general readership" will not know (nor read per link) what Either/Or is, nor quantum mechanics (which would need a link if mentioned). I suggest you try something more basic, perhaps mention scientists, or topics. Keep in mind that the title doesn't even give away that it's about physics. Perhaps the full title would be an option? - In the article, I think the table could be improved in two respects: 1) explain the chapter numbers above it and shorten the headers in the table, 2) combine the "equal" entries in the left column, - compare this table. - Also waiting for qpq. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gerda! I have corrected the table, will provide QPQ later today, and will think more on further ALTs that are a little more generally appealing, here is one for now that changes very little but addresses some of your points. Footlessmouse (talk) 21:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1:... that, in his 1973 book on the history of physics, George Holton argues that the philosophy book Either/Or played a major role in the development of the complementarity principle of quantum mechanics?
ALT2:~~... that, according to the book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought, physicist Niels Bohr was influenced by the philosophy book Either/Or when formulating the principle of complementarity?~~
ALT3:... that, in Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought, George Holton argues that the physicist Niels Bohr was influenced by the philosophy book Either/Or when he formulated the concept of complementarity?

Gerda, what do you think of these alts? Thank you for the review, please let me know if there is anything else that can be improved in the article, I believe I have addressed your concerns above. Footlessmouse (talk) 06:00, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The table looks great! Thank you for trying hard with the hook. We'll get there, but so far still some criticism, some very minor: I believe that the initial comma is correct but is in the way of the flow. I like: "physicist", "argues", "philosophy", "formulated". I don't like: the title piped, "book" repeated, "book" not mentioned for the first book. I believe that "Kepler to Einstein" would be the shortest way to establish context. So my take would be:

ALT4: ... that in his book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein, George Holton argued that Niels Bohr was influenced by philosophy from Either/Or when he formulated the concept of complementarity?

Go ahead, trim, play with the elements, and write a review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda, this sounds good to me, but the only way I can find to bring it under 200 characters is to drop the subtitle. I tried playing with it in other ways, but this is the best I can do: Footlessmouse (talk) 08:00, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALT5: ... that in his book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought, George Holton argued that Niels Bohr was influenced by philosophy from Either/Or when he formulated the concept of complementarity?

You are right about the length, I didn't even check.

ALT6: ... that in his book Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein, George Holton argued that philosophy from Either/Or influenced Niels Bohr's concept of complementarity?

ALT5 and ALT6 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

a minor extra: I don't believe in template dynamic list, - it could be used for almost every article on Wikipedia ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]