Talk:Capacitance electroscope

THis stuff should be covered in the electrometer article. Light current 02:20, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Actually, it is not. Otherwise I would have made a redirect to electrometer. This is a particular typo of electroscope, which was historically used to quantitate the volta effect. The electrometer article has no discussion of the historical use to measure the volta effect, or of using a dielectric to increase the amount of charge accumulated so as tto use it as a quantitative device. Salsb 02:26, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed the change for is to should. I think there is defintely enough for two articles.Salsb 02:27, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Yes that was my fleeting error.! At present, we have put all the 'electroscope' and 'electrometer' material in the same article (because we could not really decide on the fundamental difference between them[1] ). If there is enough material on electroscopes alone, then it may be a good idea to split the material into 2 articles eventually. For now I think its a good idea to merge them. Light current 03:13, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Although I personally would redirect electrometer to electroscope, I agree that the general topic of electroscope/electrometer should be in one article, but specific articles on specific types is warranted. Much as, for example, there are specific articles on specific magnets, and a general article on magnets. Salsb 11:39, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

When there is enough material on the capacitance electrometer as a special instrument(distinct from other electrometers), then I don't think you'll find much opposition to creating a separate article for it with maybe a link from electrometer to it. At the moment though, there is not really enough material there for a 'standalone' IMHO. Light current 12:46, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

if you browse through the electromagnetism category, you will see that usually each different device has its own stub or article, and note that in the electrometer article you have a red link -- indicating the desire for an article -- to another particular type of electroscope. The consistent approach appears to be one of different stubs/articles for each device, and one for the general type of device. It also is not clear to me that section redirects work seamlessly; as in an article that links here should not link straight to electroscope, but to a section on capacitance electroscope. If you really want to merge it to electroscope, do so; I will not, but I won't revert it, if its done well.. Make sure any links here still work, and you probably will have to change the discussion of electroscopes as well, since this type is designed to be quantitative, whereas the electroscope definition under Electrometer implies that they are purely qualitative. Salsb 13:37, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

As Im sure you know, the article started as one on electrometers. (hence the title of the article). The original author, it seems, was a little confused (as I was) as, to the differences. As the article was entitled Electometers I thought it wise to actually mention some modern electrometers. I have only just noticed your stub on capacitance electroscopes. Now we have a page covering all sorts of electrometers and electroscopes. Although the distinction was rather hazy at some point in the past, perhaps soon would be a good time to arbitrarily define the difference and split this article into two. Can we have other comments please before we take action ?-Light current 14:33, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

The description of the device appears to refer to a "condenser electroscope", that doesn't have dielectric material "between the leaves" at all.