this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
1194 points (98.1% liked)

People Twitter

6975 readers
2315 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] littlebrother@lemm.ee 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Police. Yeah I'd like to report a murder.

[–] 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Good luck finding the body, that lake never gives up her dead

[–] littlebrother@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago

When the skies of November turn gloomy

[–] briever@lemm.ee 2 points 7 hours ago

That is outstanding.

[–] Goretantath@lemm.ee 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I'd still argue water molecules touching eachother make themselves wet, but that guy is an ass so fuck him.

[–] klao@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 minutes ago* (last edited 9 minutes ago)

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

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 18 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

You fucking idiots. Real ones know wetness is how much vermouth it has in it.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 10 points 11 hours ago

Churchill apocryphally liked his martinis so dry that he would observe the bottle of vermouth while pouring the gin, and that was enough

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I'd like a proper wet and dirty one right now, gawddamn

[–] orochi02@feddit.org 5 points 13 hours ago

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?

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 21 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (3 children)

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.

[–] klao@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 minutes ago

No, if water was just hydrogens yes 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)

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago
  1. Maybe. You are made mostly of water, so I don't see why lot.
  2. Same logic applies to liquids that aren't water.
  3. Gasoline being wet is an actual term, though.
  4. Yes, you have wet sugar. The sugar has just become reeeaaaally really small.
  5. The phone is dry. The bag it's in is moist.
  6. If those materials are so scared of water, they shouldn't be near water.
  7. Steam has air between it. It's dry or moist. Ice is just water holding g hands.
[–] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 9 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

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

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Is the polar-bonded surface layer of water wet? It is not entirely surrounded by water.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

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.

[–] Robust_Mirror@aussie.zone 4 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Well no one would consider something with a single water molecule on it wet either.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dan69@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Just wait till lakes home pull up..

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 18 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

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.

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 12 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I was not expecting something I could not understand

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] scheep@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

I learned something new today

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 4 points 18 hours ago

More reasonably, "wet" is often used as an adjective describing something that is liquid. Wet paint is, of course, wet.

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 8 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

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)
[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 31 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I had no idea that a lake could be so saucy with the comebacks. Glad to hear that it lives up to its name.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mlegstrong@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 day ago (6 children)

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.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago (16 children)

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)
[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 19 hours ago

Wetting is an actual physical process that occurs between a liquid and a solid, or two unmixable liquids:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetting

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 91 points 1 day ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

The gales of November came way early this year.

load more comments
view more: next ›