Water is wet.


PFG, Picture Framing God
Founding Member
Aug 12, 2000
San Diego, CA
Ron said that on HH, opinions would be offered to the statement," water is wet". I'm wondering what would happen on The Grumble.

Huh? I think I missed something.
that's an interesting question. how do we really know water is wet?
Is Ron saying that the HH are an opinionated group?
From past experience with HH, I'd say that if you told them the sky was up, somebody would argue and/or disagree...and not necessarily in a friendly manner.
I took a workshop at the Athens Decor Expo (223 B.C.) from Archimedes. I can't put my finger on the class handout right now, but I'm certain he said that water exists in 73 distinct states, with only one of them being wet.

I am NOT a physicist, so you should consult one who is familiar with the physical laws in your state.

And do a search of the archives. The older ones.

By the way, that's the LAST time I'm picking up Mark and FramerGuy and driving non-stop to Athens!

(Sorry. JRB started it.)
If, by wet, you mean liquid moisture, condensed H20 or the contents of your bath tub (assuming the dog is not in it) then you are most certainly correct and it is highly illegal to say otherwise.
To clarify: I was talking about Jim Archimedes. Paul Archimedes (no relation) is an educational consultant for Evian, so everything he says about water is highly suspect.

Personally, I'm a purist, so I only use distilled water, even on the lawn.

The lawn says it doesn't care, but I am a CPF and (marginally) smarter than my lawn, so I just do what I know is the right thing.

Besides, I don't want the lawn to come back and sue me for negligence. Or sue my children. Or my children's children.

So there!

(****! Framer put back the "edited by" message. You can't get away with ANYTHING around here.)

[ 03-14-2004, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: Ron Eggers ]
>I do know that it can destroy a giclee in >seconds.

Actually, water in steam form will destroy a giclee and other inkjet photos instantly, and I am pretty sure it is detrimental to every other type of print over time. Wet or not, it is evil! ;)


Mark Rogers
Frame Destination
Out of curiosity I looked up the definition of wet, and would have to say, no, water is not wet. It causes wetness.

adj 1: covered or soaked with a liquid such as water; "a wet bathing suit"; "wet sidewalks"; "wet paint"; "wet weather"

1. Containing, or consisting of, water or other liquid; moist; soaked with a liquid; having water or other liquid upon the surface; as, wet land; a wet cloth; a wet table.

Ok, enough time wasted, time to do something productive!


Mark Rogers
Frame Destination
Somehow I don't think this is the end of this. 11 opinions in less than 12 hours. HH, look out, you have competition.

Originally posted by Ron Eggers:
but I'm certain he said that water exists in 73 distinct states
I thought there were only 50 states.

My turn.When Jesus changed the water into wine at the wedding feast did he make it DRY? If so could we say that the water was no longer WET?
Well you see John anyone can be silly ,but when does the differance of opinions and the exchange of ideas become purely argumentative and when is it meant to be truely helpful?
I value all opinions when I ask a question ,but then I start with the idea that I don't know the answer and after weighing as many as I can get I probaly will come to a better understanding.Don't you think so?No matter where they come from.
Yes, to all you stated Buddy. Nothing wrong with a good argument now and then though. There is a reason for a Devils advocate in any serious strategy meeting, helps people to really think about their position.

Lets not Frankenthread this important topic though.

A numerical technique for the computation of two-dimensional non-equilibrium homogeneously condensing flows is based on the conservation laws of mass, momentum and energy for wetness.

1) The gas phase is an ideal gas. 2) A liquid phase consists of droplets whose radii are in the order of 106 m or less, therefore, the wetness is a homogeneous fluid. 3) A nucleation is the homogeneous nucleation.

The system of the conservation laws is descretized based on the Chakravarthy-Osher TVD scheme and the former assumptions. A wetness mass fraction is deduced from the conservation law of the liquid phase, including the homogeneous nucleation and growth of the existing droplets, which are described by the classical nucleation theory.

Max, I was about to say that...
Did you know that Water is in its most condensed state? Just thought I would add that. I think this should be the next poll!
Prior to determining if water is wet we must as a group determine the definition of wet. Then determine the physical state of the water we are describing. Correct? Language is ambiguous and full understanding of the query is necessary for a correct easement to be determined.

Jill Hennes CPF
Hydrogen, easy to make, even easier to ignite...

Wet? Who cares, it's all about the BANG!!!
Originally posted by BUDDY:
My turn.When Jesus changed the water into wine at the wedding feast did he make it DRY?
That depends, Burgundy or Port? :rolleyes:
Regarding water, my experience & training are limited, but I have found water to be wet at 6:30 am in my shower, in my driveway during every rainstorm, and occasionally at other times & places.

The question is: How wet is it?

Some waters are wetter than others, you know.
Water in and of itself is NOT Wet! It can create wetness and make other things wet. Organic solvents can make things wet but are again not wet themselves. A diaper can get wet, You can jump into a pool and get wet, you can take a shower (Thank Goodness Jim Does) and get wet. If you pour water into a glass the glass get's wet, the water is still just water. Wet is a condition, not a property. A property of water is that it can make things wet.

So there!
For the first time ever on this forum I completely concur with Jerry.....I'm going out to check for locusts.....
I've done some research.....

In the framework of empirical physics of matter, in Thermodynamics, these properties were measured and interrelated in a logically consistent manner. The resulting theoretical body allowed scientists to write up exact relations between measured properties. However, as long as the molecular or atomic nature of matter was not included in the theory, a complete prediction of the numerical values of these observables was impossible.

To take an example: the entropy difference between two states of a system was operationally defined as the integral (assuming a reversible path from to ), but the numerical value of could not be predicted even for an ideal gas. Similarly, thermodynamic reasoning shows that the difference between the specific heats and must exactly equal , where and are the expansions coefficient and the isothermal compressibility, respectively; but a specific value for or cannot be predicted.

Let us dream for a moment: what if we could calculate, say, the entropy of a piece of matter on the basis of microscopic considerations? Assuming we could find an explicit expression for - entropy as a function of energy and volume - then this would give us access to all the riches of thermodynamic phenomena. All we would have to do is take the inverse function and apply the thermodynamic relations , , etc.

Our project then is to describe the mechanics of an assembly of many ( ) particles with mutual interactions. The only way to do this is by application of statistical methods: a rigorous analysis of the coupled motions of many particles is simply impossible.

It should be noted, however, that with the emergence of fast computing machines it became possible to perform numerical simulations on suitable model systems. It is sometimes sufficient to simulate systems of several hundred particles only: the properties of such small systems differ by no more than a few percent from those of macroscopic samples. In this manner we may check theoretical predictions referring to simplified - and therefore not entirely realistic - model systems. An important example are ``gases'' made up of hard spheres. The properties of such gases may be predicted by theory and ``measured'' in a simulation. The importance of computer simulation for research does not end here. In addition to simple, generic models one may also simulate more realistic and complex systems. In fact, some microscopic properties of such systems are accessible neither to direct experiment nor to theory - but to simulation.

In the context of this course simulations will be used mainly for the visualisation of the statistical-mechanical truths which we derive by mathematical means. Or vice versa: having watched the chaotic buffeting of a few dozen simulated particles we will courageously set out to analyse the essential, regular features hidden in that disorderly motion.

Thus our modest goal will be to identify a microscopic quantity that has all the properties of the thing we call entropy. For a particularly simple model system, the ideal gas, we will even write down an explicit formula for the function . Keeping our eyes open as we take a walk through the neat front yard of ideal gas theory, we may well learn something about other, more complex systems such as crystals, liquids, or photon gases.

The grown-up child's inquiry why the water is wet will have to remain unanswered for some more time. Even if we reformulate it in appropriate terms, asking for a microscopic-statistical explanation for the phenomenon of wetting, it exceeds the frame of this introductory treatment. - And so much the better: curiosity, after all, is the well spring of all science.

Just as I thought, nobody knows why water is wet.....
H ell. I'm so confused now that I'm not even sure if the shower I thought I took was really effective, what with all this talk of 'water' vs 'wetness'.
Being a simple man, water is wet. It has been for 54 years, at least, and if I go out in the rain, that's all the proof I need.

Now, on to more pressing matters: Can matter EVER be completely destroyed, or does it merely change states?
Y'all chew on that for a while...no, wait...if you chew on a piece of link sausage, is it still sausage, after being chewed, or does it 'change states', and become, say, Tennessee?
Yes, some link sausage's change from a solid or simi-solid to a gas. (methane) :eek:
Ah, but it has not been destroyed...merely changed states.

By the way, I love listening to KDAV, and the Jimmie Mac Show from 9PM to midnight! Especially the locally produced commercials! The Plumber Man and the Lawyer That's Not Licensed To Practice In The State Of Texas are two that come to mind.
Jimmie almost had me talked into moving to Lubbock once.
KDAV was the first radio station to play county (or hillbilly) music 24hr a day. My grandparents owned one of the two record stores at the time and they ordered records for KDAV. Waylon Jennings (who was a DJ at the time) would pick up the 78s. I have recepts that show Buddy Holly's family still has an outstanding debt to my Grandparent's shop. Let's see, componded intrest monthly for 50 years........
Anyway how do you get KDAV in NC?

Originally posted by rogatory:
Anyway how do you get KDAV in NC?-David-
They have a subscription service for streaming audio, and I subscribe. Actually, and interestingly enough, there are people all over the world that subscribe. www.kdav.com

Hanna...and don't forget poor ol' Smeagol was fishing with his brother when he dove (dived?) under the water and found the One Ring, hence becoming Gollum and living in a cave with his "Precioussss..."
Yeah, we need to ban water, and substitute Stolichnya vodka or Boodles gin as a substitute. Although outgassing might be a problem in some cases.
Were up to 35 opinions so far. I think it is time that one of you PPFA members posed the same statement on HH, just to see what would happen.

And we can't forget Kurt Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle", wherein we learn about the dreaded
'ICE 9'
Water may or may not be wet. I will stay out of that debate. However, for those who think it's not wet enough you can always buy Water Wetter (it's used in performance engines to increase the effective capacity of its cooling system).
Originally posted by JRB:
Were up to 35 opinions so far. I think it is time that one of you PPFA members posed the same statement on HH, just to see what would happen.

Hitch Hikers is censored and would probably be deemed unworthy of the attention. The Grumble is all that really counts.
Originally posted by Jerry Ervin:
Hitch Hikers is censored and would probably be deemed unworthy of the attention. The Grumble is all that really counts.
Right on!!
Originally posted by mcphoto:
Another invigorating thought:

Is ice "hard" water or is "hard" water ice?
Ice is a physical state of matter namely water. Ice is the solid form of water.
Hard water is water that contains a large amount of minerals ie Calcium, Magnesium, Sodium.

Matter can neither be created nor destroyed, there is a finite amount of matter in the Universe, digested sausage gives you gas and North Carolina, I don't know which is worse.

Water is not wet but it can make you wet.
"Wet? How about extremely dangerous! Let's get this stuff banned!"

I dunno if any of you folks watch Showtime and Penn & Teller's BullS**t!, but sometime ago they actually tried just that. They were attempting to show how quickly some people are to jump onto any platform, particularly those involving environmental issues. At one such event, they had people asking for signatures to ban "Dihydrogen Oxide" or something similar to that (my high school chemistry is rusty... heck it was then too!). When partnered with statments like "It's been found to be in all of our rivers and lakes in vast quantities" most people were very quick to add their names to the ban list. Not a one stopped to think that what they were banning was really H2O! Interesting, eh?
'Were up to 35 opinions so far. I think it is time that one of you PPFA members posed the same statement on HH, just to see what would happen.'

That person would then be called a wetblanket.