Talk:Émilie du Châtelet/Archive 1

message: It looks like this entire article is just a rip from another website .  Did the author of that article give permission to do this? WoodenTaco 21:07, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright violation

message: This page is definitely taken from pg. 603 of HMCO's "A History of Western Society"
I have marked this page for requiring cleanup. Xiamcitizen 06:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote the first paragraph (in two stages – see History) in response to the complaint at "Physicist?", below, that there wasn't enough in the page about her scientific contributions. It is my own work. I don't argue in support of the rest of it (which could perhaps do with a bit of pruning anyway). Old Moonraker 08:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To assist, some of my sources for para 1: Online essay from Public Broadcast Service ; Encylopædia Britannica 1998 edition; The scientist that history forgot ; The scientist whom history forgot. There were others. Old Moonraker 09:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first paragraph does not appear to be taken from the text, thanks for the clarification, Moon. This section, however, does. Xiamcitizen 07:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given the section you were complaining of a copyedit and broadened its sources. I don't know the work you believe to be the original source, so I can't say for certain whether or not this will satisfy your concerns. --Old Moonraker 14:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A History of Western Society

message: The article says :" by the age of twelve she was fluent in Latin, Italian, French, Greek, and German." I find it unremarkable that someone French is reasonably fluent in French by age 12. Is this a typo for another language? Tonywalton  | Talk 21:32, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs to be included, whether or not you think it is remarkable.  Gene Nygaard 22:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For "remarkable", read "notable".  Or are you of the opinion that every native speaker of a language is notable in WP terms, so should have the fact noted in their article, for being able to speak it? Tonywalton  | Talk 22:25, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point Tony :) Maybe the original author meant to say English -- anyway I should check it but pretty sure she was fluent in English. Lisa 13:24, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Languages

message: Is it correct to refer to the subject of this article throughout as Émilie. For comparison, her father is refered to as Breteuil rather than Louis-Auguste. It seems a little sexist that Châtelet is refered to by her personal name. Now, one problem with calling her Châtelet is that she was only known as such from the time of her marriage. However, I think it is possible to describe her as Breteuil (or Émilie de Breteuil, to distinguish her from her father) in the section on her early life. --Gareth Hughes 20:29, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest that she be called "Émilie" before her marriage, and "De Châtelet" after.123.255.28.22 (talk) 02:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Châtelet's name 

message: There is either an error in this article or in the article for Louis-Charles-Auguste le Tonnelier de Breteuil, listed here as her father; if you follow the link to his article you find that he was born in 1730 while his "daughter" was born in 1706.  Do we have the wrong Louis-Charles-Auguste?
There is evidence to suggest that her mother not only approved of her education in the sciences, but was actually the parent that taught and most encouraged her in the sciences.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.94.211 (talk) 03:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emilie's father 

message: There's supposed to be a new book (in English) out about her; I heard an interview with the author, who claimed that she fought a duel at Versailles when she was a teenager... AnonMoos 07:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if the author might be David Bodanis? He seems to have "rediscovered" her during his research for his book on Einstein "E=mc2". Also, she is positively portrayed in the PBS NOVA dvd documentary of the book. title is "Einstein's Big Idea". Engr105th (talk) 19:19, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New biography

message: User WinstonWinston placed this link to an article from the not-for-profit Cabinet (magazine). This was reverted, with an automatically-generated summary. This seems to be a worthwhile item, free from advertising (albeit when reading the posting history there is suggestion that the magazine may be promoting itself) and I would like to reinstate the link, subject to other editors' views. --Old Moonraker 17:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted it as this user is clearly spamming — adding numerous links to one website with no other contribution is considered spam. However, if anyone feels the article is useful, and it falls within the guidelines for external links, it could be re-added. Re-adding multiple links to this magazine's website would, though, be considered spamming. — Gareth Hughes 17:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original poster's intention may well be self-promotion, but the article's good, and it's from a not-for-profit source. Reistated. --Old Moonraker 10:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cabinet (magazine)]] link 

message: Whoever put in the comment up to a factor of 1/2 is obviously not a physicist.  Kinetic energy is equal to mv^2/2 to first order.  (e.g. When the v is much less than c.)  In Emilie's time, mass was considered a constant.   So her equation should really be stated as m_0v^2/2 (where m_0 is rest mass) in modern notation.  Einstien's equations tell us the amount of energy required approaches infinity as v approaches the speed of light.   Émilie equation tell us the amount of kenetic energy to go the speed of light is finite.  Refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence Docbillnet (talk) 14:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct to first order 

message: Substituted at 16:08, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment