this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Murdered by Words

1540 readers
1 users here now

Responses that completely destroy the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply - a targeted, well-placed response to another person, organization, or group of people.

The following things are not grounds for murder:

Rules:

  1. Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone else.
  2. Discussion is encouraged but arguments are not. Don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguments sake.
  3. No bigotry of any kind.
  4. Censor the person info of anyone not in the public eye.
  5. If you break the rules you’ll get one warning before you’re banned.
  6. Enjoy the community in the light hearted way it’s intended.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Unless it is one solitary molecule of water, the water molecules are in contact with other water molecules, making them wet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I've never thought about water not being wet. This troubles me.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

It's like ... beer isn't drunk, so water isn't wet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Don't listen to the siren call of Twitter, their claims are based on a flawed understanding of physical science.

It is true, water makes things wet, it is not in and of itself wet, however all bodies of water you deal with on a day to day basis are not a singular object. They are uncountable multitudes of unconnected molecules of water, touching each other in a glorious slippery puddle of co-wetness.

Water is thus wet, in liquid form. Interestingly enough, water is by definition not a liquid if it is just a lone molecule, therefore all liquid water exists in the state of mutually assured wetness.

However, some unearned pedantry is allowed to dunk on bigots. They sure as hell don't let facts stop them.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Also since oil and water don't mix, oil is also not wet, nor does it make things wet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

And yet things can be soaked with oil

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Gonna have to disagree with Lake Superior on this one...water is wet

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

They just ended the debate on if water is wet lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn't say so, and for the same reason they claim water isnt wet i claim water is wet: unless it's just a single molecule, water touches (and even clings to) water. So water is wet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)
  • What if you have two molecules of H2O that are below 0°C or above 100°C?
  • What if you have two molecules of some other liquid substance that are also polar like H2O?
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

I'd say that the liquid phase is implied. Nobody is arguing whether a solid is wet.

And this is just by feel, but I'd say yes. Wetness is polar liquids sticking to stuff.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Zoolander did that 23 years ago lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Apply cold water to the site of the burn

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Fortunately, the Lake has plenty of cold water for that guy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Since water is touching itself, wouldn't that make it wet but that definition?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

My favourite answer to this is Emergence, which was explained well in a recent kurzgesagt video.

Basically Emergence dictates that a group of things (like H2O molecules) can form something greater than the sum of itself (wetness). In the molecules wetness is not a thing, but the interaction of water with something else creates wetness. This concept cannot reasonably be boiled down to the molecular level, it only exists on this plane of existence.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

"Most scientists define wetness as a liquid's ability to maintain contact with a solid surface, meaning that water itself is not wet, but can make other sensation. But if you define wet as 'made of liquid or moisture', as some do, then water and all other liquids can be considered wet."

https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-water-wet 9 Nov 2023

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

If something is not wet, we call it dry, still waiting for someone to tell me water is fucking dry.

I'm just talking about the wetness of water here, I support abortion rights.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

It's neither because the concept isn't applicable. It's like dividing by 0. You can string the symbols together, but they don't mean anything.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

What about gases, are gases wet or dry?

You say a gas is wet if it contains water, ok what about if the gas contains mercury, is that wet? Is pure liquid mercury wet or dry?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I've had the 'can you make water more wet?' conversation before. The answer we arrived at varies based on the definition of wet so we had to define wet first.

We concluded that wetness is usually judged by how liquid something is or how much liquid it has with it. Our liquidity was based on viscosity so it's possible to make a liquid more wet by decreasing viscosity. Viscosity can be altered by adding a different viscosity liquid to it. There are things less viscous than water so in adding them you can make water more wet. Viscosity can also be changed by changing the temperature. As temperature increases viscosity decreases until water becomes a gas and dissipates into the air. We got a bit stuck here since at this point we no longer considered the water to be wet but did think that the air was wet. There was wetness, but since the mix was more air than water the water's wetness was decreasing. We concluded there was some nebulous level of humidity that would be considered wet, but it would be wet air rather than dry water.

Then we looked at it the other way. At low temperatures the viscosity of water increases until it eventually crystalizes into a solid. As long as it stayed frozen it had none of the properties we considered wet. Completely frozen water could be considered dry.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Then what about dry ice? That's frozen carbon dioxide, so it is waterless ice. It is called dry because it lacks any water. Is water ice more or less wet than dry ice?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

People have been describing wine as dry for ages

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

For those who,like me, didn't get the fitzgerald reference:

SS Edmund Fitzgerald was an American Great Lakes freighter that sank in Lake Superior during a storm on November 10, 1975, with the loss of the entire crew of 29 men.

From the Wikipedia article

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

A great fucking song too.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

The Punch Brothers did an amazing cover, too. Source.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

good job, lake. this is why you're superior.