The argument about Wikipedia versus Britannica continues to rage in libraryland. The questions are about authority and the likelihood of outright deception, of course, and a recent round brought up the limitations of peer review as exemplified in the 1989 cold fusion controversy, where two scientists claimed to have achieved a nuclear fusion reaction at room temperature. Randy Souther, from the University of San Francisco, asked us to look more carefully:
FYI, cold fusion in 1989 was a media fiasco, but not a fraud. The research is still controversial, but continues today with publications in more than 50 peer-reviewed journals. But you would never realize this by reading Britannica’s one-paragraph article, which is stuck in 1989; Wikipedia’s gives a reasonable overview, and is up-to-date.
So I looked. Here’s the 175 words the Encyclopeadia Britannica Online used to cover the matter:
The fusion of two atomic nuclei at cool temperatures is referred to as cold fusion. Nuclear fusion has been an important area of study in nuclear physics since the 1940s, and from that time, researchers have pursued the possibility of harnessing fusion, which can produce huge amounts of energy from mere hydrogen with minimal radioactive waste, for the generation of electricity. The main obstacle to practical applications of nuclear fusion is that atoms must be heated to tens of millions of degrees Celsius in order to combine at sufficiently high rates. In 1989, however, chemists B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann claimed to have fused atoms of deuterium, which is also called heavy hydrogen because its mass is twice that of ordinary hydrogen, in a simple electric cell at room temperature. The experiment generated great excitement in the scientific community, but other scientists were unable to duplicate Pons and Fleischmann’s results, and their findings were ultimately discredited. Despite skepticism among most nuclear fusion experts, some researchers continue to study the possibility of cold fusion.
And here’s just the introduction to the Wikipedia article:
Cold fusion is the name for a nuclear fusion reaction that occurs well below the temperature required for thermonuclear reactions (millions of degrees Celsius). Such reactions may occur near room temperature and atmospheric pressure, and even in a relatively small (table top) experiment. In a narrower sense, “cold fusion” also refers to a particular type of fusion supposedly occurring in electrolytic cells.
The term “cold fusion” was coined by Dr Paul Palmer of Brigham Young University in 1986 in an investigation of “geo-fusion”, or the possible existence of fusion in a planetary core. It was brought into popular consciousness by the controversy surrounding the Fleischmann-Pons experiment in March of 1989. A number of other scientists have reported replication of their experimental observation of anomalous heat generation in electrolytic cells, but in a non-predictable way, and most scientists believe that there is no proof of cold fusion in these experiments. A majority of scientists consider this research to be pseudoscience, while proponents argue that they are conducting valid experiments in a protoscience that challenges mainstream thinking.
The subject has been of scientific interest since nuclear fusion was first understood. Hot nuclear fusion using deuterium yields large amounts of energy, uses an abundant fuel source, and produces only small amounts of manageable waste; thus a cheap and simple process of nuclear fusion would have great economic impact. Unfortunately, no “cold” fusion experiments that gave an otherwise unexplainable net release of energy have so far been reproducible.
Wordcounts don’t measure quality, but Wikipedia’s 247 word introduction seems much more useful than Britannica’s entire article. More importantly, I like this article as an example of how Wikipedia handles controversy. We’ve seen controversy in articles about charged political or social issues, but I think it’s much easier for most readers to look at this one without feeling for the issue at hand.
Separately… They’re both online, but which one is easier to read? Which one best takes advantage of the medium?
And for those who are interested in cold fusion, Randy (who’s Joyce Carol Oats website rocks) suggested two books on the matter for further reading:
controversy, authority, wikipedia, encyclopedia britannica, encyclopeadia britannica, britannica, encyclopedia, encyclopedias, cold fusion
Related:
Posted January 5, 2006 by Casey
Categories: Libraries & Networked Information, Technology. Tags: authority, Britannica, cold fusion, controversy, encyclopeadia britannica, encyclopedia, encyclopedia britannica, encyclopedias, wikipedia.
1 Comment(s)
No comments yet.
Comments RSS
TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
User contributed tags for this post:
grizzly man controversy (10) - britannica on wikipedia (8) - google earth controversy (8) - Controversy surrounding Wikipedia (6) - cold fusion energy Wikipedia (6) - gogle eyes (6) - wikipedia earthmap (6) - encyclopeadia britannica (6) - cold fusion controversy (5) - britannica and i (5) - fusion (5) - britannica controversy (4) - hacking cold fusion reactor (4) - arguments for nuclear fusion (4) - Nuclear Fusion Controversy (4) - gogle wikipedia (4) - cold fusion wikipedia (4) - Google earth Controversy surrounding the The google ear (4) - wikipedia controversy britannica (4) - Nuclear Fusion (4) - all (4) - cold fusion (4) - britannica movie (3) - grizzly man wikipedia (3) - wikipedia nuclear fusion (3) - google eart fusion (3) - wikipedia britannica controversy (3) - reading britannica (3) - wikipedia controversial (3) - Gogle Earthmap (3) - cold fusion blog deuterium (2) - gogle earth combines (2) - wikipedia replication san (2) - wikipedia barstow (2) - britannica encyclopeadia (2) - cold fusion nuclear 2007 (2) - hot video com (2) - cold fusion movie songs (2) - wikipedia cold (2) - looking for encyclopedia britannica (2) - britannica fraud (2) - COLDFUSION ECONOMICAL (2) - encyclopedia britannica (2) - coldfusion controversy (2) - wikipedia vs britannica statics (2) - coldfusion movie (2) - hot film (2) - wikipedia controversy sex (2) - coldfusion experiment (2) - coldfusion research (2) - Cold fusion film (2) - cold fusion economic impact (2) - cold fusion 2006 (2) - wikipedia 89 com (2) - Britannica and Wikipedia (2) - controversy and encyclopedias (2) - britannica movie trailer (2) - cold fusion experiment replication (2) - google earth and the controversy surrounding it (2) - wikipedia cold fusion (2) - grizzly man controversial (2) - controversy of nuclear fusion (2) - cold reaction (2) - cold fusion reactions (2) - satellite look on erth (2) - political controversy wikipedia (2) - nuclear fusion controversial (2) - cold fusion controversial (2) - gogle temperature (2) - Britannica Fusion (2) - tens gogle (2) - looking for controversy in science (2) - cold nuclear fusion Wikipedia (2) - wikipedia ERTH (2) - Pons and Martin Fleischmann wiki (1) - obstacle to the generation of electrical energy from fu (1) - http://www google com/webhp?start=0&ie=utf-8&oe (1) - cold fusion wikipedia controversy (1) - wikipedia britanica controversy (1) - controversies of nuclear fusion (1) - Fleischmann-Pons experiment (1) - Controversial arguments for nuclear fusion (1) - Coldfusion study 1989 (1) - What is waste generation Wikepidia (1) - Fleischmann Pons photo (1) - Encyclopeadia Britannica Wikipedia (1) - controversy about wikipedia (1) - F (1) - what is the controversy surrounding cold fusion (1) - cold fusion reactor (1) - wikipedia controversy surrounding (1) - 2cold fusion research (1) - hydrogen fusion wikipedia (1) - wikipedia impact on britannica (1) - coldfusion energy 2007 (1) - wikipedia controversy (1) - what coldfusion controversial (1) - vonage controversy wiki (1) - cold fusion wiki (1) - http://www.google.com/webhp?start=0&ie=utf (1) - sexs experiment (1) - ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COLD FUSION (1) - coldfusion Fleischmann (1) - britanica and wikipedia (1) - nuclear fusion wiki (1) - the controversy that wikipedia went thru (1) - controversies surrounding peer pressure (1) - nuclear fusion impact economy (1) - coldfusion movie music (1) - w w w real looking for sexe video.com (1) - cold nuclear fusion obstacles (1) - sexs pons (1) - big mac controversy 1989 (1) - waste generation search in wikipedia (1) - coldfusion encyclopedia (1) - encyclopeadia brittannica (1) - nuclear fusion, wikipedia (1) - controversy surrounding coldfusion (1) - dr casey and coldfusion (1) - britannica versus wikipedia statistics (1) - coldfusion britannica (1) - wikipedia controversies (1) - controversy with coldfusion (1) - coldfusion economical impact (1) - pons fleischmann wikipedia (1) - COLD fusion-MOVIE (1) - hot sexs com (1) - cold fusion research scam fraud (1) - articles about controversy and google earth (1) - controversy in the grizzly man (1) - britannica scam (1) - unexplainable net (1) - fusion food in wikipedia (1) - social issue nuclear fusion (1) - google fusion nuclear (1) - Google Earth controversies (1) - where does joyce carol oats leave (1) - coldfusion nuclear (1) - Coldfusion energy (1) - controversial grizzly man (1) - Wikipedia coldfusion energy (1) - meta fusion wikipedia (1) - coined the word cold fusion (1) - hot sexs (1) - large girlsex (1) - looking 89 com (1) - controversy cold fusion 1989 (1) - excess sexs (1) - cold fusion 1989 controversy (1) - 1989 gogle earth map (1) -
