re: DJ Chark thinks water is not wet

quote:

---

H20 is just the forumla, but they are different forms with entirely different properties.

---

H2O remains the same throughout all phases. The bonds between the molecules change, leading to different states of matter. So like I have been saying, your argument is that H2O MOLECULES can be wet. Which is erroneous, good sir.

quote:

---

Volume is the measure of space that matter occupies. The container only serves to hold the liquid and to measure it. What "thickness" will an amount of water have when you pour it on the floor? Do you not see the ridiculousness of your rebuttals?

---

essentially volume is = W x L x H. You are saying that pouring water on the ground means that there will be no height/depth dimension? If you make H = 0 then volume = 0. Volume does not change regardless of the container.

You refer to water poured onto the ground assuming its thickness/height/depth is reduced to 0 or no longer present. However If you make any of the dimensions equal to 0 then there is no volume. If there is any water, it occupies a volume, so we know that there are still 3 dimensions of measurement that exist and are greater than 0. The ground just happens to be very shallow so a very small depth would exist.

Arguing that one of these dimensions can go to 0 is the most ridiculous rebuttal It would mean the liquid just no longer exists as it is spilled on the ground.

Children learn this concept at like 4-5... its called conservation.

quote:

---

Thank you for reiterating my point. Water only assumes the shape of its container. For you to say that water ever has its own shape is INCORRECT.

---

I never said water has its own shape, but it does have a shape, just happens to be whatever it is contained in. (I have never seen water not contained by something in any way shape or form, even a vacuum is a container).

quote:

---

Therefore, you haven’t removed water from ice nor from steam. Therefore, you did not dry them of water. Aka. They are not wet.

---

you have removed LIQUID. AKA - dried.

quote:

---

you have removed LIQUID. AKA - dried.

---

I have a shirt. It’s soaked with water.

I freeze said shirt.

By freezing the shirt, I didn’t make the water magically disappear. It’s still there.

If I take the shirt to a lab and have a forensic analysis done, will it still contain water?

If yes, how is this possible? I thought you said freezing the shirt would make the water disappear?

quote:

---

I have a shirt. It’s soaked with water.

I freeze said shirt.

---

Let me know if there's any liquid left on that shirt after freezing it. no liquid = dry.

quote:

---

essentially volume is = W x L x H.

---

Negative. I have already defined volume properly for you.

quote:

---

You refer to water poured onto the ground assuming its thickness/height/depth is reduced to 0 or no longer present. However If you make any of the dimensions equal to 0 then there is no volume. If there is any water, it occupies a volume, so we know that there are still 3 dimensions of measurement that exist and are greater than 0. The ground just happens to be very shallow so a very small depth would exist.

Arguing that one of these dimensions can go to 0 is the most ridiculous rebuttal It would mean the liquid just no longer exists as it is spilled on the ground.

Children learn this concept at like 4-5... its called conservation.

---

You are in your own world on this one. You just do not understand basic chemistry, and you also do not understand the physical world at the molecular level. That's fine, but you continue to show your arse when several people more knowledgeable than yourself have gone through unnecessary lengths to inform you of what you do not know.

quote:

---

I never said water has its own shape

---

quote:

---

Just because the shape is not defined, does not mean the shape does not exist.

---

quote:

---

wrrrrrrronnngggggg. (Still)

---

so wet = saturated in water/liquids

and it's a fact that water is saturated by water.

so water is saturated with water, but isn't wet? By definition it must be wet.

quote:

---

so wet = saturated in water/liquids

---

Yep.

quote:

---

and it's a fact that water is saturated by water.

---

No. Water isn’t saturated with water

quote:

---

so water is saturated with water, but isn't wet? By definition it must be wet.

---

You really are a fricking idiot.

quote:

---

Negative. I have already defined volume properly for you.

You are in your own world on this one. You just do not understand basic chemistry, and you also do not understand the physical world at the molecular level. That's fine, but you continue to show your arse when several people more knowledgeable than yourself have gone through unnecessary lengths to inform you of what you do not know.

---

hilarious coming from someone who doesnt think water is wet and that you have a substance with 0 depth/thickness.

Space is occupied in at least 3 dimensions, baw. Dimensions can change and fluctuate, but not go to 0 for a given amount of water. Conservation refers to the ability to determine that a certain quantity will remain the same despite adjustment of the container, shape, or apparent size.

quote:

---

Just because the shape is not defined, does not mean the shape does not exist.

---

Right. no defined shape, but it does take the shape of the container. So there can be a shape to water if it is contained by something. (all water is contained by something)