| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
| | "Cry" 3,182,592 | | "Cry" 3,182,592 |
| | [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 13:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC) | | [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 13:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC) |
| − | :Thanks. Here goes after 1 day and 2 hours:
| |
| − | :9.500.026 (+6692/+,07%)
| |
| − | :4.083.297 (+3839/+,09%)
| |
| − | :3.184.334 (+1742/+,05%)
| |
| − | :I'm nut sure we can learn anything from this yet...?--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:55, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| | | | |
| | Actually, if the star or region of space is anything similar to our own, O2 is definitively a sign of life. Not animal life, but at least plant life, to crack the O2 out of the CO2 with photosynthesis.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC) | | Actually, if the star or region of space is anything similar to our own, O2 is definitively a sign of life. Not animal life, but at least plant life, to crack the O2 out of the CO2 with photosynthesis.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC) |
| | :The explanation currently covers links that show that not all oxygen will be created because of life, and not all life (even 'as we know it') will necessarily require/produce a significant oxygen signal. But there seems to be a missing middle-bit in that oxygen initially seems to have been a smothering 'industrial pollutant' by early (oxygen splitting) life-forms until other life-forms developed the machinary to use this oxygen as part of their own energy mechanisms (creating the eventual two-way dynamic of CO<sub>2</sub> and O<sub>2</sub> production/usage between the ''major'' groups of life) and thus making the unstable free oxygen both an indicator of life and an indicator of the ''capability'' of life (by mainstream terrestrial standards of biology, of course). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.186|141.101.98.186]] 18:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC) | | :The explanation currently covers links that show that not all oxygen will be created because of life, and not all life (even 'as we know it') will necessarily require/produce a significant oxygen signal. But there seems to be a missing middle-bit in that oxygen initially seems to have been a smothering 'industrial pollutant' by early (oxygen splitting) life-forms until other life-forms developed the machinary to use this oxygen as part of their own energy mechanisms (creating the eventual two-way dynamic of CO<sub>2</sub> and O<sub>2</sub> production/usage between the ''major'' groups of life) and thus making the unstable free oxygen both an indicator of life and an indicator of the ''capability'' of life (by mainstream terrestrial standards of biology, of course). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.186|141.101.98.186]] 18:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC) |
| − | :That is not necessarily true. There is now a theory that oxygen could be have been created without life involved here on Earth based on the snow ball earth scenario. In the ice H2O2 formed and when the ice melted this was released into the water where it then would release oxygen. See for instance here: [http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10662-did-snowball-earths-melting-let-oxygen-fuel-life.html#.VT-QbRTU-i4 Did snowball Earth's melting let oxygen fuel life?]. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:09, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I'm pretty sure the original lyric for "This Kiss" is "it's centripetal motion" (see: http://www.sweetslyrics.com/59372.Faith%20Hill%20-%20This%20Kiss.html). I assumed the joke Randall was making was that centrifugal really is a force, Mr. Bond, even if Faith Hill doesn't know about it. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 00:25, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − | :I agree: I only recall hearing "centripetal motion", but Google tells me there are actually more hits for "centrifugal", and that there are some lyrics sites putting ''both'' phrases in the song. [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 01:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::I think the song says "centrifical" which is not even a word, let alone a force, ficticious or not. Nonetheless, it seems to be a common misspelling since it has its own wiktionary entry (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/centrifical). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.180|108.162.249.180]] 08:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::I agree that she doesn't sing centrifugal. I have changed the explain to say it is centripetal (I'm sure she is supposed to at least, maybe she doesn't know the word either ;-) But left in a comment on the fact that there are different versions on-line. But I'm sure that that is because people do not know the word centripetal and also that people who make lyrics pages cut and paste from each other. I have often seen the same mistake on several lyrics pages. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − | :::Its not centripetal, she sings "centrifugal" but with pronounced wrong. Its a pop song, and centrifugal with a long u wouldn't fit, so the i is short but stressed, and the u is reduced to a schwa. Rightly or wrongly, "centrifugal" is the common word.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.43|141.101.70.43]] 18:37, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::::How is it pronounced wrongly? There's two pronunciations for the word "centrifugal," and one of them is without a long-U sound. /sɛnˈtrɪf yə gəl, -ə gəl/ (see: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/centrifugal?s=t) Maybe she's a bit harder on the G than might be proper, but most people I know pronounce it as she does, or close enough anyway. -- [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.188|108.162.237.188]] 03:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
| − | ::: I believe a close viewing of the linked official video of "This Kiss" makes it certain that Ms. Hill is singing "centrifugal". To see this, examine some frames near 0:33, when Ms. Hill is singing "centrifugal" for the first time. Although (so far as I can tell) YouTube does not support frame-by-frame advance, you can hit play and stop in rapid succession, and convince yourself quite thoroughly that Ms. Hill's top teeth are always visible, and that her lips never meet. Compare this to the very first frames of the cut at 1:19 when Ms. Hill is just beginning to sing "pivotal". You will very clearly see her lips touching and slightly pursed. (Is there a way to attach screenshots?) Given that it is impossible to pronounce a "p" phoneme without the lips coming together at some point, Ms. Hill is not singing a word with a "p" in it at 0:33, but rather one with an "f," pronounced with the top teeth touching the bottom lip -- "centrifugal," in fact. Conclusion: Randall is quoting the actual lyrics intended by the singer on the official video. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.87|173.245.52.87]] 01:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
| |
