Talk:Water: Difference between revisions
imported>Eddie Ortiz Nieves (→You got me!: reply) |
imported>Anthony.Sebastian (→Interloper: new section) |
||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
You got me, Eddie! I'm slack on filling out the subpages pages. --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 21:45, 22 October 2007 (CDT) | You got me, Eddie! I'm slack on filling out the subpages pages. --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 21:45, 22 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
:That's what colleagues are for, eh? :-) --[[User:Eddie Ortiz Nieves|Eddie Ortiz Nieves]] 21:48, 22 October 2007 (CDT) | :That's what colleagues are for, eh? :-) --[[User:Eddie Ortiz Nieves|Eddie Ortiz Nieves]] 21:48, 22 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
== Interloper == | |||
Robert: Pardon my interloping and changing the approach to 'water'. You should feel free to undo and/or change it any way you see fit. Consider it only a suggestion. --[[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] [[User talk:Anthony.Sebastian|(Talk)]] 23:05, 22 October 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 23:05, 22 October 2007
Wip
--Robert W King 12:23, 22 August 2007 (CDT)
Possible References:
- http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/WeighingWater/
- http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/molecule.html
- http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/characteristics.html
Elements
There are four "elements" of the earth--water, fire, wind, and earth itself; I have tried to alleviate any potential confusion by adding "non-chemical" element, and I hope it suits. --Robert W King 12:36, 23 August 2007 (CDT)
- "Non-chemical" does not make sense. See my edit summary. Michael Hardy 17:16, 24 August 2007 (CDT)
Definition of water
On the question of the definition of water: interestingly, in the philosophy of language, it is often discussed as an example what the meaning of "water" is (particularly, whether H20 is the "definition" of water--Putnam asked, if you came across something on "Twin Earth" that had the same observable properties as water, but was not H20, would that be water?). This is perhaps irrelevant, except in this general point: to speak of the definition of words for what philosophers call "natural kinds" (like water) is highly problematic. This does not mean that the words cannot be given definitions (obviously, they can), but rather that the criteria one might use to decide what is an "objective definition," so to speak, are not at all clear. And then of course most philosophers, following Wittgenstein and Quine, would in fact deny that words for natural kinds could be given definitions at all.
I suspect that asserting that water "by definition" is or is not liquid belies any understanding of these issues. Many people do mean something liquid when they speak of water, but maybe that's just because that's how water usually is when we encounter it. Anyway, if water were a liquid "by definition," then it would be contradictory to speak of frozen water, or water in a gaseous state. Clearly, that is not (always) contradictory, because we do use those phrases with good sense. --Larry Sanger 20:18, 24 August 2007 (CDT)
Also...stylistically, this article badly needs work. The style is wordy and pretentious-sounding. We can do much better. --Larry Sanger 20:20, 24 August 2007 (CDT)
Freezing point
The freezing point of water is not well-defined. However the melting point of hexagonal Ih ice (the naturally abundant ice) is well defined, it is 273.152519 K = 0.002519 celcius at 101.325 kPa see [1]--Paul Wormer 08:02, 31 August 2007 (CDT)
- Paul--in what context should this information be added? I'm slightly mystified. --Robert W King 10:12, 31 August 2007 (CDT)
- I don't know either, that is why I put it here and not in the article. Maybe when somebody extends the article this small piece of information can be entered into it.--Paul Wormer 11:18, 31 August 2007 (CDT)
You got me!
You got me, Eddie! I'm slack on filling out the subpages pages. --Robert W King 21:45, 22 October 2007 (CDT)
- That's what colleagues are for, eh? :-) --Eddie Ortiz Nieves 21:48, 22 October 2007 (CDT)
Interloper
Robert: Pardon my interloping and changing the approach to 'water'. You should feel free to undo and/or change it any way you see fit. Consider it only a suggestion. --Anthony.Sebastian (Talk) 23:05, 22 October 2007 (CDT)
- Article with Definition
- Physics Category Check
- Chemistry Category Check
- Biology Category Check
- Developing Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Physics Developing Articles
- Physics Nonstub Articles
- Physics Internal Articles
- Chemistry Developing Articles
- Chemistry Nonstub Articles
- Chemistry Internal Articles
- Biology Developing Articles
- Biology Nonstub Articles
- Biology Internal Articles
- Physics Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Chemistry Underlinked Articles
- Biology Underlinked Articles
- Chemical Engineering tag
- Environmental Engineering tag