Irrational meter - why the mark of a triplet in 4 half notes












5















Can someone please explain to me why the mark of a triplet in this 4 half notes? I understood how to play it but from what i read you can only write triplets on 3 notes like 3 eighths 3 quarters etc...
See picture
enter image description here






notation time-signatures







share|improve this question




















  • 2





    There are whole, half, quarter etc. notes, but nothing that shows third. So, to me, the 4/3 time signature is somewhat pointless, as to show 'proper' notes, they need to have the 'triplet' sign. I reckon it could be written out in standard form and make more sense.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Because there is no notehead shape that alone depicts 1/3 note. there's 1/2, 1/4,1/8, but no 1/3. Same reason as triplets themselves.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm fairly certain that there are better ways to show what needs playing rather than use irrational meters. Judging by the question, I'm not alone.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @Artelius -- a time signature is not a fraction, and irrational time signature has an entirely different meaning than irrational number.

    – David Bowling
    2 days ago






  • 1





    My comment was tongue in cheek. Music and mathematics go hand in hand, though, and I think this is somewhat of an unfortunate (dare I say, irrational?) terminology. Also, in my view a time signature is a fraction (but it is not just a fraction). As a fraction it indicates how many whole notes fit in a bar. Of course it has other, perhaps more important meanings.

    – Artelius
    2 days ago
















5















Can someone please explain to me why the mark of a triplet in this 4 half notes? I understood how to play it but from what i read you can only write triplets on 3 notes like 3 eighths 3 quarters etc...
See picture
enter image description here






notation time-signatures







share|improve this question




















  • 2





    There are whole, half, quarter etc. notes, but nothing that shows third. So, to me, the 4/3 time signature is somewhat pointless, as to show 'proper' notes, they need to have the 'triplet' sign. I reckon it could be written out in standard form and make more sense.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Because there is no notehead shape that alone depicts 1/3 note. there's 1/2, 1/4,1/8, but no 1/3. Same reason as triplets themselves.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm fairly certain that there are better ways to show what needs playing rather than use irrational meters. Judging by the question, I'm not alone.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @Artelius -- a time signature is not a fraction, and irrational time signature has an entirely different meaning than irrational number.

    – David Bowling
    2 days ago






  • 1





    My comment was tongue in cheek. Music and mathematics go hand in hand, though, and I think this is somewhat of an unfortunate (dare I say, irrational?) terminology. Also, in my view a time signature is a fraction (but it is not just a fraction). As a fraction it indicates how many whole notes fit in a bar. Of course it has other, perhaps more important meanings.

    – Artelius
    2 days ago














5












5








5


1






Can someone please explain to me why the mark of a triplet in this 4 half notes? I understood how to play it but from what i read you can only write triplets on 3 notes like 3 eighths 3 quarters etc...
See picture
enter image description here






notation time-signatures







share|improve this question
















Can someone please explain to me why the mark of a triplet in this 4 half notes? I understood how to play it but from what i read you can only write triplets on 3 notes like 3 eighths 3 quarters etc...
See picture
enter image description here






notation time-signatures




notation time-signatures






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









guidot

5,8671035




5,8671035










asked 2 days ago









LoveIsHereLoveIsHere

559314




559314








  • 2





    There are whole, half, quarter etc. notes, but nothing that shows third. So, to me, the 4/3 time signature is somewhat pointless, as to show 'proper' notes, they need to have the 'triplet' sign. I reckon it could be written out in standard form and make more sense.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Because there is no notehead shape that alone depicts 1/3 note. there's 1/2, 1/4,1/8, but no 1/3. Same reason as triplets themselves.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm fairly certain that there are better ways to show what needs playing rather than use irrational meters. Judging by the question, I'm not alone.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @Artelius -- a time signature is not a fraction, and irrational time signature has an entirely different meaning than irrational number.

    – David Bowling
    2 days ago






  • 1





    My comment was tongue in cheek. Music and mathematics go hand in hand, though, and I think this is somewhat of an unfortunate (dare I say, irrational?) terminology. Also, in my view a time signature is a fraction (but it is not just a fraction). As a fraction it indicates how many whole notes fit in a bar. Of course it has other, perhaps more important meanings.

    – Artelius
    2 days ago














  • 2





    There are whole, half, quarter etc. notes, but nothing that shows third. So, to me, the 4/3 time signature is somewhat pointless, as to show 'proper' notes, they need to have the 'triplet' sign. I reckon it could be written out in standard form and make more sense.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Because there is no notehead shape that alone depicts 1/3 note. there's 1/2, 1/4,1/8, but no 1/3. Same reason as triplets themselves.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 1





    I'm fairly certain that there are better ways to show what needs playing rather than use irrational meters. Judging by the question, I'm not alone.

    – Tim
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @Artelius -- a time signature is not a fraction, and irrational time signature has an entirely different meaning than irrational number.

    – David Bowling
    2 days ago






  • 1





    My comment was tongue in cheek. Music and mathematics go hand in hand, though, and I think this is somewhat of an unfortunate (dare I say, irrational?) terminology. Also, in my view a time signature is a fraction (but it is not just a fraction). As a fraction it indicates how many whole notes fit in a bar. Of course it has other, perhaps more important meanings.

    – Artelius
    2 days ago








2




2





There are whole, half, quarter etc. notes, but nothing that shows third. So, to me, the 4/3 time signature is somewhat pointless, as to show 'proper' notes, they need to have the 'triplet' sign. I reckon it could be written out in standard form and make more sense.

– Tim
2 days ago





There are whole, half, quarter etc. notes, but nothing that shows third. So, to me, the 4/3 time signature is somewhat pointless, as to show 'proper' notes, they need to have the 'triplet' sign. I reckon it could be written out in standard form and make more sense.

– Tim
2 days ago




1




1





Because there is no notehead shape that alone depicts 1/3 note. there's 1/2, 1/4,1/8, but no 1/3. Same reason as triplets themselves.

– Tim
2 days ago





Because there is no notehead shape that alone depicts 1/3 note. there's 1/2, 1/4,1/8, but no 1/3. Same reason as triplets themselves.

– Tim
2 days ago




1




1





I'm fairly certain that there are better ways to show what needs playing rather than use irrational meters. Judging by the question, I'm not alone.

– Tim
2 days ago





I'm fairly certain that there are better ways to show what needs playing rather than use irrational meters. Judging by the question, I'm not alone.

– Tim
2 days ago




3




3





@Artelius -- a time signature is not a fraction, and irrational time signature has an entirely different meaning than irrational number.

– David Bowling
2 days ago





@Artelius -- a time signature is not a fraction, and irrational time signature has an entirely different meaning than irrational number.

– David Bowling
2 days ago




1




1





My comment was tongue in cheek. Music and mathematics go hand in hand, though, and I think this is somewhat of an unfortunate (dare I say, irrational?) terminology. Also, in my view a time signature is a fraction (but it is not just a fraction). As a fraction it indicates how many whole notes fit in a bar. Of course it has other, perhaps more important meanings.

– Artelius
2 days ago





My comment was tongue in cheek. Music and mathematics go hand in hand, though, and I think this is somewhat of an unfortunate (dare I say, irrational?) terminology. Also, in my view a time signature is a fraction (but it is not just a fraction). As a fraction it indicates how many whole notes fit in a bar. Of course it has other, perhaps more important meanings.

– Artelius
2 days ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4














The problem is, that tuplet just means some note length modification takes place. Mathematically you require a standard fraction with numerator and denominator and there seem to be different opinions which of those to put into the tuplet bracket.



Wikipedia suggest under Tuplet Notation a full fraction representation in the form 2:3 for exotic cases, but I have never seen one.



So counting the note values and looking at the current time signature may be necessary for resolution.






share|improve this answer































    4














    To answer your last question: the use of 'triplet' indicator is allowable for any length note. It tells you to play the three marked notes so that each takes up 1/3 the meter-time that would have normally been covered by two of the notes in question. Thus, in quarter time meter, a one-beat triplet is written with eighth notes (normally two per quarter note), a two-beat triplet is written with quarter notes, etc.



    The use of anything other than 2,4,8,16 as the denominator of the designated meter is highly discouraged, especially among those of us who have to perform the piece.






    share|improve this answer
























    • So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

      – LoveIsHere
      2 days ago











    • “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

      – leftaroundabout
      2 days ago











    • @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

      – Carl Witthoft
      2 days ago











    • Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

      – leftaroundabout
      2 days ago











    • Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

      – Carl Witthoft
      2 days ago












    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "240"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f82049%2firrational-meter-why-the-mark-of-a-triplet-in-4-half-notes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    4














    The problem is, that tuplet just means some note length modification takes place. Mathematically you require a standard fraction with numerator and denominator and there seem to be different opinions which of those to put into the tuplet bracket.



    Wikipedia suggest under Tuplet Notation a full fraction representation in the form 2:3 for exotic cases, but I have never seen one.



    So counting the note values and looking at the current time signature may be necessary for resolution.






    share|improve this answer




























      4














      The problem is, that tuplet just means some note length modification takes place. Mathematically you require a standard fraction with numerator and denominator and there seem to be different opinions which of those to put into the tuplet bracket.



      Wikipedia suggest under Tuplet Notation a full fraction representation in the form 2:3 for exotic cases, but I have never seen one.



      So counting the note values and looking at the current time signature may be necessary for resolution.






      share|improve this answer


























        4












        4








        4







        The problem is, that tuplet just means some note length modification takes place. Mathematically you require a standard fraction with numerator and denominator and there seem to be different opinions which of those to put into the tuplet bracket.



        Wikipedia suggest under Tuplet Notation a full fraction representation in the form 2:3 for exotic cases, but I have never seen one.



        So counting the note values and looking at the current time signature may be necessary for resolution.






        share|improve this answer













        The problem is, that tuplet just means some note length modification takes place. Mathematically you require a standard fraction with numerator and denominator and there seem to be different opinions which of those to put into the tuplet bracket.



        Wikipedia suggest under Tuplet Notation a full fraction representation in the form 2:3 for exotic cases, but I have never seen one.



        So counting the note values and looking at the current time signature may be necessary for resolution.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 days ago









        guidotguidot

        5,8671035




        5,8671035























            4














            To answer your last question: the use of 'triplet' indicator is allowable for any length note. It tells you to play the three marked notes so that each takes up 1/3 the meter-time that would have normally been covered by two of the notes in question. Thus, in quarter time meter, a one-beat triplet is written with eighth notes (normally two per quarter note), a two-beat triplet is written with quarter notes, etc.



            The use of anything other than 2,4,8,16 as the denominator of the designated meter is highly discouraged, especially among those of us who have to perform the piece.






            share|improve this answer
























            • So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

              – LoveIsHere
              2 days ago











            • “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago











            • Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago
















            4














            To answer your last question: the use of 'triplet' indicator is allowable for any length note. It tells you to play the three marked notes so that each takes up 1/3 the meter-time that would have normally been covered by two of the notes in question. Thus, in quarter time meter, a one-beat triplet is written with eighth notes (normally two per quarter note), a two-beat triplet is written with quarter notes, etc.



            The use of anything other than 2,4,8,16 as the denominator of the designated meter is highly discouraged, especially among those of us who have to perform the piece.






            share|improve this answer
























            • So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

              – LoveIsHere
              2 days ago











            • “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago











            • Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago














            4












            4








            4







            To answer your last question: the use of 'triplet' indicator is allowable for any length note. It tells you to play the three marked notes so that each takes up 1/3 the meter-time that would have normally been covered by two of the notes in question. Thus, in quarter time meter, a one-beat triplet is written with eighth notes (normally two per quarter note), a two-beat triplet is written with quarter notes, etc.



            The use of anything other than 2,4,8,16 as the denominator of the designated meter is highly discouraged, especially among those of us who have to perform the piece.






            share|improve this answer













            To answer your last question: the use of 'triplet' indicator is allowable for any length note. It tells you to play the three marked notes so that each takes up 1/3 the meter-time that would have normally been covered by two of the notes in question. Thus, in quarter time meter, a one-beat triplet is written with eighth notes (normally two per quarter note), a two-beat triplet is written with quarter notes, etc.



            The use of anything other than 2,4,8,16 as the denominator of the designated meter is highly discouraged, especially among those of us who have to perform the piece.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 2 days ago









            Carl WitthoftCarl Witthoft

            9,00121330




            9,00121330













            • So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

              – LoveIsHere
              2 days ago











            • “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago











            • Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago



















            • So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

              – LoveIsHere
              2 days ago











            • “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago











            • Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

              – leftaroundabout
              2 days ago











            • Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

              – Carl Witthoft
              2 days ago

















            So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

            – LoveIsHere
            2 days ago





            So if it was 6/5 time signature and there were 5 half notes i would but the number 5 benith the notes? Even if it does not makes sense :-)?

            – LoveIsHere
            2 days ago













            “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

            – leftaroundabout
            2 days ago





            “highly discouraged” – that seems a bit of a fogyish attitude, no? Normal odd time signatures like 5/4 were probably also highly discouraged at some point, but I'd argue that it's very much a good thing that they eventually become widespread for where it makes sense. Sure you could denote that all in 4/4 with silly incompletely meters, but with a 5/4 signature it can get more directly to the musical intention. I don't see why that would be fundamentally different with irrational signatures.

            – leftaroundabout
            2 days ago













            @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

            – Carl Witthoft
            2 days ago





            @leftaroundabout It is different because there are no symbols for notes that have anything other than 2^(-k) duration. Thus no point in an N/3 time signature.

            – Carl Witthoft
            2 days ago













            Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

            – leftaroundabout
            2 days ago





            Um, yes there are such symbols: tuplets.

            – leftaroundabout
            2 days ago













            Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

            – Carl Witthoft
            2 days ago





            Ummm, no, that is a deviation from the actual note symbol which requires the "3" indicator. Why would you write 4/3 time and then go ahead and write some half-notes with a "3" over them? Other than composer-wanking, it serves no purpose.

            – Carl Witthoft
            2 days ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f82049%2firrational-meter-why-the-mark-of-a-triplet-in-4-half-notes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            數位音樂下載

            Image
            數位音樂下載 為非以「實體」方式來販賣音樂的相關產品，而使用數位格式如mp3、AAC等文件格式來進行銷售販賣的一种音乐产业形式。著名的數位音樂下載服務商有iTunes Store、RecoChoku、Google Play音乐和微软Zune等。数字音乐下载在二十一世纪初一度风靡全球， [1] [2] 使得传统唱片产业走向衰落，但其自身也在2010年代流媒体音乐服务如Apple Music、Spotify等的挤压下迅速失去市场份额。 [3] [4] 数字音乐下载有便于携带、传播迅速、制作简单成本低等优点，与流媒体音乐相比也能更好保障音乐人权益； [5] 但它同时很可能带来侵犯版权和滥用的情形， [6] 也给音乐产业带来了诸多不利影响。数字音乐下载为音乐人和乐迷提供了更加便捷直接的交流渠道，也一定程度上推动了网络音乐人的出现和独立音乐的迅速发展。 [7] 目录 1 历史 1.1 技术积淀（1987-2000） 1.2 出现与兴起（2000-2004） 1.3 唱片市场的颠覆者（2004-2007） 1.4 巅峰和衰落（2005-2013） 1.5 摇摇欲坠的现状与不可预知的明天（2014至今） 2 主要文件格式 2.1 PCM编码格式 2.1.1 WAV 2.1.2 APE 2.1.3 FLAC 2.2 苹果推出的无损文件格式 2.2.1 AIFF 2.2.2 ALAC 2.3 有损压缩格式 2.3.1 MP3 2.3.2 AAC 3 主要市场 3.1 iTunes Store 3.2 Google Play音乐商店 3.3 亚马逊音乐商店 3.4 部分其他音乐商店 4 影响与评价 4.1 对音乐产业的影响 4.2 对科技行业的影响 4.3 正面评价 4.4 负面评价 4.4.1 侵权问题 4.4.2 经营模式不明晰 4.4.3 不适应移动时代 4.5 文化现象 5 延伸阅读 6 参考资料 历史 苹果iTunes+iPod的软硬件搭配让数字音...
            Read more

            When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?

            Image
            2 I don't know why balance of the address is 0. when can this situation? etherscan balances share | improve this question asked yesterday Ru Hi Ru Hi 11 1 New contributor Ru Hi is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment  |  ...
            Read more

            格利澤436b

            Image
            格利泽436b 太陽系外行星 太陽系外行星列表 艺术家笔下的格利泽436b 母恆星 母恆星 Gliese 436 星座 獅子座 赤經 ( α ) 11 h  42 m  11.0941 s [1] 赤緯 ( δ ) +26° 42′ 23.652″ [1] 距離 33.4 ly (10.2 pc) 光譜類型 M2.5 V [1] 軌道參數 半长轴 ( a ) 0.0291±0.0004 [2] AU 軌道離心率 ( e ) 0.150±0.012 [2] 公轉週期 ( P ) 2.643904±0.000005 [3] d (0.00723849 y) 軌道傾角 ( i ) 85.8 +0.21 −0.25 [3] ° 角距 ( θ ) 2.794 mas 近星點時間 ( T 0 ) 2,451,551.716 ±0.01 JD 半振幅 ( K ) 18.68±0.8 m/s 物理性质 质量 ( m ) 22.2±1.0 [2] M ⊕ 半徑 ( r ) 4.327±0.183 [2] [4] R ⊕ 密度 ( ρ ) 1.51 g cm -3 表面重力 ( g ) 1.18 g 溫度 ( T ) 712±36 [2] K 發現 發現時間 2004 發現者 巴特勒、沃格特、 馬西 et al. 發現方法 徑向速度、凌日法 發現地點 美國加利福尼亞州 發表論文 出版 其他名稱 Ross 905 b, GJ 436 b, [5] LTT 13213 b, GCTP 2704.10 b, LHS 310, AC+27:28217 b, Vyssotsky 616 b, HIP 57087 b, GEN# +9.80120068 b, LP 319-75 b, G 121-7 b, LSPM J1142+2642 b, 1RXS J114211.9+264328 b, ASCC 683818 b, G 147-68 b, UCAC2 41198281 b, BP...
            Read more