Police. Yeah I'd like to report a murder.
this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
1217 points (98.1% liked)
People Twitter
6978 readers
1636 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Good luck finding the body, that lake never gives up her dead
When the skies of November turn gloomy
You fucking idiots. Real ones know wetness is how much vermouth it has in it.
Churchill apocryphally liked his martinis so dry that he would observe the bottle of vermouth while pouring the gin, and that was enough
I'd like a proper wet and dirty one right now, gawddamn
I'd still argue water molecules touching eachother make themselves wet, but that guy is an ass so fuck him.
actually water molecules are cohesive (attracted to each other, yes in that sense you are right) but wetness is associated with adhesion which basically means the possibility of a liquid to adhere to a solid surface so no, water molecule themselves alone are not enough to fit into the definition of wetness i hope i wasnt too technical but i tried to be as dummy as possible
Wwweeeeeeeellllllll see, water is also touching itself constantly. Something being wet is a material surrounded by water, like the fibers of a sponge surrounded by water, in example.
In water, every water molecule is surrounded by water molecules. This means every given water molecule can be considered wet. And thus water is wet.
no, if water was just hydrogens yes but no because then its no longer water but with the oxygen the water molecules are not exactly touching each other plus the definition of wetness is about the adhesion (liquid to solid surface contact) and water is cohesive (attracted to each other)
Something being wet is a material surrounded by water
So if I set my hand in water it's not wet because it's not immersed? What if it's not water?
Can other liquids be wet? If I dump water into a bucket of gasoline, is my gasoline wet?
If I mix a soluble powder into water, like sugar, do I have wet sugar or sugared water?
Do they have to be in contact? Is a phone in a bag in water wet because it's surrounded by water, or dry because there's air between it and the water?
What about those hydrophobic materials that can be dunked in water and come out dry?
What about non-liquid phases of water? Is steam wet? If I dump water on ice is there a difference in how wet it is?
The common colloquial definition of "wet" is "to be touched by a liquid". The scientific is for a liquid to displace a gas to maintain contact with a surface via intramolecular forces. Water becomes a better wetter if we add soap because it no longer tries to bind to itself instead of what it's wetting.
Neither of these has the water itself being wet, but you can have "wet ice".
Let's not pretend that a more scientific sounding colloquial definition is actually more scientific.
you're right about this
“to be touched by a liquid”
but its more of a simple definition however if you went more technical by biology and chemistry laws, wetness is about adhesion (liquid to solid surface contact) and water is cohesive (attracted to each other) but if you want to get reallyyyy into it you might tell me about mercurium, have you seen mercurium? because its freaking cool btw chemistry ftw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upRM7ykQloI
the reason why mercurium wont wet things is because its cohesion is stronger than its adhesion, so any liquid that happens to be like this, this is why
- Maybe. You are made mostly of water, so I don't see why lot.
- Same logic applies to liquids that aren't water.
- Gasoline being wet is an actual term, though.
- Yes, you have wet sugar. The sugar has just become reeeaaaally really small.
- The phone is dry. The bag it's in is moist.
- If those materials are so scared of water, they shouldn't be near water.
- Steam has air between it. It's dry or moist. Ice is just water holding g hands.
If I have a single water molecule then it is still water but it isn’t touching any other water molecule, thus it isn’t wet
Exactly. So the only instance water is dry, and thus not wet, is if it's a single lonely molecule.
But water tends to come in herds, so that basically never happens.
Is the polar-bonded surface layer of water wet? It is not entirely surrounded by water.
I'd say that's dry, as it's in contact with air. Or perhaps just moist, as it's partially in contact with water.
Well no one would consider something with a single water molecule on it wet either.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That is outstanding.
Oh please someone argue this with me!
I love semantic bs!
Water is touching water, so therefore water is wet!
Not that Thomas isn't a piece of shit regardless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetting
Wetting is the ability of a liquid to displace gas to maintain contact with a solid surface, resulting from intermolecular interactions when the two are brought together.[1] These interactions occur in the presence of either a gaseous phase or another liquid phase not miscible with the wetting liquid.
Fair enough. I was not expecting something I could not understand
Basically, the process of making something wet requires a liquid (usually water) to actually stick to it, through intermolecular forces. That's slightly more narrow a requirement than the "needs to touch water" that's commonly thrown around. A lotus flower or water repellent jacket doesn't get wet, even if you spray water on it, the droplets don't actually stick to the surface.
Now, water molecules stick to each other as well, that's called surface tension. But wetness, at least in physics, is defined at an interface between two mediums, a liquid and a solid, or two liquids that don't mix
load more comments
(1 replies)
Saying water is wet because it touches water sounds like "Fire is on fire because it touches fire". It just sounds fundamentally illogical as you're talking about a state of matter, not the matter itself.
I'm not a scientist, just throwing in my view on this
load more comments
(5 replies)
More reasonably, "wet" is often used as an adjective describing something that is liquid. Wet paint is, of course, wet.
Nevermind what his view on abortion is. Why does he have to start something on a post about womens rights unless he thinks they should not have rights?
I had no idea that a lake could be so saucy with the comebacks. Glad to hear that it lives up to its name.
well it is superior
Burnt by water, ouch!
Lake Superior used Scald!
The irony of this statement—for any one who’s ever been in Lake Superior—is immense.
load more comments
(1 replies)
A single molecule of water is not wet but as soon as more then one molecule is present the water is then wet. That is my hill to die on in this argument.
I disagree. Mixing water and another liquid does not make the second liquid "wet" - it makes a mixture. Then if you apply that mixture to a solid the solid becomes wet until the liquid leaves through various processes and becomes dry. If that process is evaporation, the air does not become wet it becomes humid.
load more comments
(16 replies)
If there is two molecules of water which one is the dry molecule and which one is the wet molecule?
If there are three molecules does one get divided in half to make the other two wet or does only one get wet and one stays dry until a fourth arrives?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Getting into a political argument with a lake account. The lake account using 1st person language as Lake Superior.
Our ancestors would marvel at our reality!
I don't know, getting into arguments with sentient geo/hydrological features seems like the kind of thing our ancestors would have done
load more comments
(5 replies)
Just wait till lakes home pull up..
view more: next ›