Water is wet, prove me wrong

Water is wet, prove me wrong.

Other urls found in this thread:

insidermonkey.com/blog/7-easiest-painless-ways-of-killing-yourselves-quickest-360388/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

that's a stupid nigger argument that only stupid niggers argue about

fire is on fire

insidermonkey.com/blog/7-easiest-painless-ways-of-killing-yourselves-quickest-360388/

>It seems like you need this.

water itself cannot be wet because water is already full of wetness. things you pour water on are wet. and pouring water onto water would just increase the amount of water but not increase the amount of wetness. therefore water is not wet.

/thread

Water is moist, not wet you fucking brainlet.

>water itself cannot be wet because water is already full of wetness
>water is already full of wetness
>water is wetness

Well actually, if you define wetness as the amount of water molecules in close proximity to the object in question, then any collection of more than one h2o molecule will classify as "wet". Following this, water in the center of a glass will be wetter than the water around the edges.

>There are water molecules in the air
>air is dry
>water is not wet

the glass itself would be wet not the water. water is already full of wetness, you cant add more wet to it. therefore it's not wet.

air is moist, therefore water is moist

air has humidity, measure of water molecules in air

Wet is a state defined through an observer interacting with a material, water is not intrinsically wet, only until sentient interaction is the wetness realised.

Everything in "contact" with the water at the molecular level is wet, I see no reason why h2o should be exempt from this when it is made of the same stuff as the glass.

I tried saying that to my friends in reletivity to the dehumidifier but they all said "HURR DURR THATS AIR BEING WET"

Pretty much this.

It's a dumb question. In order for something to be considered wet, "wetness" can't be an intrinsic attribute. It's like asking, "is a fire on fire?"

wetness is replacement of area of the solid-air interface with a solid-liquid interface and is generally accompanied by an extension of the the liquid-air interface. Wetness isn't a property of a liquid, it is a property of an interface. Thus, water alone cannot be wet. However water has a propensity to wet things.

Not here. It's -27°c. Water's hard & dry. Sublimates to vapour. I win. Next

So since an interface is created whenever an object contacts the water in order to wet the object, any instance of objects getting wet is a direct result of the water becoming wet via the interface you mentioned for the exact moment it is required to. You could say it is wet in a quantum sense.

in a quantum sense yes, but that doesn't apply much to real life. water is not wet.

ggwp

Is a nigger drowning in the water wet, or is he just a nigger?

Wetness is the human word for the perception of water water can not be wet since water can not be on top of water if you add water to water water does not become wet it just becomes more water

it's both, a nigger is a still a nigger even if it's a wet drowning nigger