this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
1218 points (98.1% liked)

People Twitter

6978 readers
1438 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. 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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There's an argument that a single molecule of water on its own would not be wet, but essentially all water is touched by other water, so even by the needlessly contrarian definition, water is wet.

Unless solid ice is "wet" you might need to reconsider the "touching molecules of water" angle.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

When I said "water," I meant it in the common, liquid sense, not the scientific designation for all dihydrogen monoxide regardless of state.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago

When I said "water," I meant it in the common, liquid sense

The reason I was being pedantic is because you specifically said a single water molecule.

Water molecules don't have a state in and of themselves. State is determined by the distance between molecules, whether they form macro crystal structures (ice).

Liquid/solid/gas is a macro state that many many water molecules might be in.

A single water molecule is a micro state, "solid" or "liquid" is meaningless in a context where we look at a single molecule and the things it immediately bonds with.

We aren't in the realm of liquid or solid, we're in the realm of covalent and hydrogen bonds.

Only when thousands of molecules get together can we start talking about "liquid" water.