Henry Moseley

Henry Moseley: An Annotated Bibliography Todd Helmenstine (November 23) November 23 Science History. Retrieved from: http://chemistry. about. com/od/novemberinscience/tp/november23history. htm In this short analysis of Moseley’s accomplishment, Helmenstine basically summed up the most important facts about Henry Moseley and his discoveries. He shows how Moseley proved that the element’s atomic number is more important than the element’s atomic weight. This proved to be important because back then, “atomic number was just a number indicating the element’s position on the periodic table and not a measurable quantity. Although the facts are short, it is a quick outlook of Moseley’s accomplishments. The information found here is safe to use because sites such as About. com do not make up any of their facts. Henry Moseley (2012) Retrieved from: http://www. famousscientists. org/henry-moseley/ This biography has far more information than the previous one. It goes deeper into Moseley’s life instead of just giving general facts about him. The author goes in chronological order by stating his early life, his middle life which includes his discoveries and accomplishments, and his life when he’s older.

It goes into more detail by giving the names of his discoveries such as Moseley’s Law which happens to be the systematic relationship between the atomic number and wavelength. The biography also explains that if he had not died in war, he would have contributed even more about the atomic structure and possibly winning a Nobel Prize. ” This biography is up to date, and seems to be reliable due to the wide range of other scientists. Heilbron, J. L. (1974). H. G. J. Moseley: The Life and Letters of an English Physicist, 1887–1915. Berkeley: University of California Press. Retrieved from: http://www. hemistryexplained. com/Ma-Na/Moseley-Henry. html In this analysis of Moseley’s life/ discoveries, more facts are being shown. For example, it shows that there was a research group composed of Ernest Rutherford, Niels Bohr, Hans Grieger, and of course Henry Moseley. All of these scientists made important discoveries, but Moseley wanted to further investigate x-rays. The author suggests that the way Moseley did things was a “classical example of the scientific method. ” The article is very excellent and seems very reliable, and it seems to have gathered information from various sources.

Henry Gwyn Jeffreys Moseley from World of Chemistry. (2005-2006) Thomson Gale, a part of the Thomson Corporation. All rights reserved. Retrieved from: http://www. bookrags. com/biography/henry-gwyn-jeffreys-moseley-woc/ Other than just saying what Moseley experimented, this biography actually explained in detail what he did exactly with the x-rays. It also explains the reason why Moseley knew why atomic number was far more important than the atomic weight. The main difference is that the variation in atomic masses between adjacent elements is never consistent, whereas the variation in nuclear charge is always precisely one. This statement is one of the most important ones because this is basically his whole discovery. The information is quite old, but it has all the same information as other reliable sites. The University of Oxford (2011) The Story of Moseley and X-rays. Retrieved from: http://www. physics. ox. ac. uk/history. asp? page=moseley Although some of the information has already been mentioned in other various sites, what many of them lack is a visual of Moseley’s experiments, and that’s exactly what this biography has. The visual portrays his experiment in exact details and all the results that came from it.

Although “there was no explanation for these multiple lines (and several other weaker lines not shown on Moseley’s diagram) and this had to await the discovery of the spin of the electron and the quantum theory, as did the slight departures from linearity. ” This shows that sometimes even the scientist that is conducting an experiment can be confused or have the lack of knowledge of something. The article found here is a year old, so the information is still valuable, and the source from which it came from is valuable.