User talk:TreeOfKnowledge
|
Moseley's law
[edit]Hi TreeOfKnowledge, check this user carefully because he's continuously spamming the whole Wikimedia project in order to massively advertise his pseudoscientific "work". He's not a true expert of physics nor of mathematics, and Moseley's law is still valid and taught in all universities (he says that he confuted this law). He's not an academic and didn't publish any peer reviewed paper, he's only a cheater searching for some notoriety. --Cisco79 (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Cisco79, thanks for the heads up. To be fair, it is difficult to find a citation in recent literature directly stating that Moseley's Law is only an approximation. The introduction to chemistry/physics texts make no mention of it, and advanced chemistry/physics texts start with the Rydberg formula and only mention Moseley's Law in passing if mentioned at all. At least now the article references the NIST data, and anyone with an understanding of rise over run can realize it is not linear. Perhaps someone can find a published peer-reviewed paper that bluntly points that out. I've pretty much exhausted much of the recent literature (over a dozen chemistry/physics books) owned or capable of being previewed. I can see how a student may be mislead into believing Moseley's Law is perfect.
- Most textbooks are written for their customers, students, who only need them to bubble in the right answers on tests, not perform actual chemistry or physics experiments, and so those little details of reality are scrubbed as frivolous and unimportant, unfortunately.
- TreeOfKnowledge (talk) 04:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi TreeOfKnowledge, in the end the truth always comes to light. I want to inform en: Wikipedia that a procedure for personal attacks has been concluded against Cisco79 (talk) https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Utenti_problematici/Cisco79/4 I hope that also en: Wikipedia takes serious measures in about the heavy personal attacks iterated on my person by Cisco79 (talk) on your talk. For further clarity, I am not a cheater, nor an academic. I am an Independent Researcher fighting for the truth. Furthermore, I hope that a vandalism procedure will be opened against Cisco79 (talk) for its appointment of cancellation on Wikimedia of my contents which fortunately have been kept.--Starace Aniello (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |