I actually asked my science teacher about this once. He said that technically, a single molecule of water isn’t wet. but two molecules of water make each other wet. Therefore, MOST water is wet.

@alexrecrem9094

3 жыл бұрын

I asked mine and every grade they just said "stop" in the most tired voice

@unh0lyillustratons

3 жыл бұрын

Interesting

@CloverPandaQ

3 жыл бұрын

no you heathen

@andjelostrbulovic

3 жыл бұрын

Objection! Two molecules make each other wet, thats true, but that only prooves that the structure of water is wet, humans are 80% water and only our inside is wet and not our outside. Therefore only our structure is wet and not our outside, water only wets things, if you pour water on water you just increase the amount of water. The defense claims water ISN'T wet.

@CloverPandaQ

3 жыл бұрын

@@andjelostrbulovic FAX

"What? Water doesn't make things wet! My body is roughly 60% water, and yet I've not been able to make a single person wet in my lifetime!"

@GoldenTheG1

3 жыл бұрын

Underrated as heck.

@TDLambisA

3 жыл бұрын

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

@drakejoshofficialyoutubech5569

3 жыл бұрын

Viergin moment

@roza7480

3 жыл бұрын

Virgin Moment

@pinguin4898

3 жыл бұрын

ah here's Larry.

“Water isn’t wet” My an intellectual: Then Water is *Dry*

@paradox_turtles2812

3 жыл бұрын

He’s too powerful to be kept alive.

@rexyjp1237

3 жыл бұрын

@@paradox_turtles2812 but dry is wet

@shigure_puriyuji

3 жыл бұрын

Dry water exist

@linkmaster253

3 жыл бұрын

@@shigure_puriyuji thick water exists too.

@shigure_puriyuji

3 жыл бұрын

@@linkmaster253 yeah along with hard and soft

The lawyers during the whole video be like: **Drinking intensifies**

@vintprox

3 жыл бұрын

more wetting the organism

@y100900185

3 жыл бұрын

@@vintprox hol’ up

@shoyostoes3129

3 жыл бұрын

@@vintproxholywaterholywaterholywaterholywaterholywaterholywater

@mushroomgirl1

3 жыл бұрын

@@shoyostoes3129 is holy water wet?

@generallyunimportant

3 жыл бұрын

coffee dehydrates you though so its not wet

Imagine being a detective your entire life to be hired to one court case asking if water is wet

@nathancarver7179

3 жыл бұрын

I would be okay with this. Getting paid to argue about a subject I have an opinion on. Wonderful!

@ScoopOfButter

3 жыл бұрын

Hahahaha

@polynuclear2970

3 жыл бұрын

@@nathancarver7179 Be a lawyer then lol

@cosmicsonicyt7555

3 жыл бұрын

Imagine your first day of being a lawyer and the judge asks eveyone this... ARE YOU GAY

@destroyerofworlds4663

3 жыл бұрын

@@ee-tq3xu you're wet?

tbh its funnier when they are having mental breakdowns and not following normal procedures

@pogobod2128

3 жыл бұрын

this is an actual serious video lmao it’s about debating if water can be considered as wet or not isn’t that already clear

@clickpause8732

3 жыл бұрын

@@pogobod2128 No, water is clear.

@pogobod2128

3 жыл бұрын

@@clickpause8732 I google translated clear and I don’t get the joke

@clickpause8732

3 жыл бұрын

@@pogobod2128 Water is transparent, which is a synonym of clear.

@ghidorah4695

3 жыл бұрын

Excuse me what the fuck water isn't clear

Godot: **Has a infinite amount of coffee in his cup**

@GeraldoTheRat

3 жыл бұрын

Phoenix: **takes one** Godot: HOW DO YOU HAVE THAT

@bellomy7478

3 жыл бұрын

Maybe he just takes *very smol sips*

@tubbytoes3005

3 жыл бұрын

@@bellomy7478 or, you know. One just magically slides toward him each time he smashes a cup on pheonix’s head

@cloaking111

3 жыл бұрын

@@tubbytoes3005 nah, sometimes he gulps the coffee down for a few seconds for dramatic effect, putting the mug at an angle that would drain it. The amount of coffee is definitely limited, as when he tosses the it at someone it drains and we can see the bottom. Another mug mysteriously slides into his opened palm afterwards. I think we can safely conclude that the mug is magical in nature, but also that we need a spinoff game in which we follow Godots' life in prison in order to find out the nature of the phenomenon

@tubbytoes3005

3 жыл бұрын

@@cloaking111 thats really what I said. a cup of coffee slides towards him each time its offscreen or when its broken. the cup could just be slided over by an assistant.

I expected this to be some typical discord chat or forum page argument, but this is so much better and I think it's fits right in the AA universe

@multiplefandoms3164

2 жыл бұрын

I do not know

The script was well made ngl

@M0D776

3 жыл бұрын

@JuicySensei kinda odd ngl

@user-xf6ox6zx4w

3 жыл бұрын

.

@IfritBoi

3 жыл бұрын

fr it doesn't even feel like a meme

@purpleyoutubeguybelike6516

3 жыл бұрын

Click this: objection.lol

@GameerGuytheGrey

3 жыл бұрын

Except for the revised claim that " The surface of the water isn't wet" since the water on the surface is still in contact with other water molecules and therefore wet. The fact that this fallacy wasn't called out but instead worked around seems like an oversight.

Once I was going to a pool and someone casually said "be careful, the water's wet"

@justcallmekai1554

3 жыл бұрын

"Be careful, something may be in the water." *smiles and walks off*

@hazeltree7738

3 жыл бұрын

You might slip on the water, it's wet

@chuunib

3 жыл бұрын

Water Is Solid

@putumban7738

3 жыл бұрын

Boi was spittin’ straight FACTS!❗️

@cradabletemp972

3 жыл бұрын

Wow, the water in my pool is dry.

"The Question is: Is water wet?" One minute later: "Please call your first wittness" That escalated quickly

*Welcome to another episode of:* *why is this in my recommended*

@DemarcusCousins_III

3 жыл бұрын

More like why does youtube know me so well

@theblueskyandrainbow

3 жыл бұрын

to me its more like oh no its another one of this again recommendation, but hey still loving it lmao

@kuri461

3 жыл бұрын

More like, another episode of searching up objection lol

@saturnknight4573

3 жыл бұрын

KZread kinda uses an algorithm to see what we like.

@derpdudtennoherelol4053

3 жыл бұрын

Another episode of: you fucking clicked on it thats why.

This is science class, *BUT BETTER*

@oyasumi9916

3 жыл бұрын

The two smart kids in science class be like

@hontoastman

3 жыл бұрын

@@oyasumi9916 lol

@bennyafton7004

3 жыл бұрын

Waaaaay better than science classes

@damiencurrency15

3 жыл бұрын

No Objections! This is a science class I would LOVE to be a part of.

@dccojocaru

3 жыл бұрын

Can we make this comment ration the original commenter "pandad"?

Next episode: “Is fire hot?”

@saifee7899

3 жыл бұрын

Ye

@ToluDude

3 жыл бұрын

Yes. Heat is tied to temperature, not fire. If something has a high temprature its hot.

@yesiam7120

3 жыл бұрын

@@ToluDude OBJECTION! there could be a cold fire. and "hot" isnt a specified temperature.

@cs0345

3 жыл бұрын

Hot is a subjective term. It's not really the fire making people feel hot, its our nerve cells reaction to the heat creating what we feel as hot. So fire can't be hot unless someone is there to feel it

@justsomeguywithatophat8502

3 жыл бұрын

@@yesiam7120 OBJECTION, there is no such thing as "cold fire". The lowest recorded is 200 to 300° which is still hot, and according to scientists, the body works best within a narrow range of body temperature- 36C to 37.5C

Short answer: Yes Long answer: No

@tantris2876

3 жыл бұрын

Bruh

@Yitewewoteli-dQw4w9WgXcQ

3 жыл бұрын

Yes is longer than no, so therefore, yes was the long answer.

@FVStageII-hg3dp

3 жыл бұрын

Short answer: yes Long answer: still yes

@ZAKINGOFDESPAIR

3 жыл бұрын

@@Yitewewoteli-dQw4w9WgXcQ *confused noises*

@MKDumas1981

3 жыл бұрын

Short answer: Yes. Long answer: Not really

"Water makes things wet!" "Then it should make itself wet!" Is where this should have ended.

@IDK098

2 жыл бұрын

Yup.

@Aesieda

2 жыл бұрын

In order for something to be considered wet, then it must also equally apply to the opposite scenario that it can be considered dry. Is there ever a case where water is dry? No, therefore, water isn't wet. Also, don't bother mentioning "dry water" since that's just a phrase describing something unrelated to actual water molecules.

@BappO-is-me

2 жыл бұрын

@@Aesieda if water isnt wet then it is dry. There is no sugar coating it

@Aesieda

2 жыл бұрын

@@BappO-is-me If something can be dry, it can also be wet. Water is neither dry nor wet, water is water.

@weshal5732

2 жыл бұрын

@@Aesieda fire is dry but never wet

i literally screamed OH GOD when i read the title cus i just knew this one was gonna be CHAOTIC

@morrowseer9969

3 жыл бұрын

I SAID THE EXACT SAME THING

@lanorris_reed3909

3 жыл бұрын

We all can relate to this

@hyrulecitizen7988

3 жыл бұрын

No kidding there!

"ACCORDNG TO WIKIPEDIA" Wright you lost me already lmfao

@Keegstar

3 жыл бұрын

Damn didn't know my teacher was here

@FiSH-iSH

3 жыл бұрын

hi mr teacher man

@cupcqke8421

3 жыл бұрын

wikipedia pages are just collections of sources made by like one person so it's understandable why a lot of people don't trust it

@helloworld5219

3 жыл бұрын

@@cupcqke8421 no everyone can make them but if you write something stupid it gets removed immediately.

@Noname-67

3 жыл бұрын

@@helloworld5219 that's why trust worthy wikipedia articles show sources for each part, but it might be wrong and outdated

Nobody: This entire video: G U L P G U L P G U L P

@LeSpaghet

3 жыл бұрын

(Drinking sounds) YOU WOULD DO THAT TOO IF YOU WERE ADDICTED TO CUSTOM MADE COLUMBIAN COFFEE!!

@kajca63

Жыл бұрын

I may have a dirty mind because I thought of something else when I saw this comment

"But at this point I don't even know what water is"

This is well done!

@alejandrotenorio80

3 жыл бұрын

Woah Miles Edgeworth

@kingblaze420

3 жыл бұрын

It is I, the favorable Prosecutor.

@randomkris1767

3 жыл бұрын

@@kingblaze420 Nice

@Leekodot15

3 жыл бұрын

And ya don't even need to prove your case.

@alejandrotenorio80

3 жыл бұрын

Can you say the autopsy report is outdated

Everyone: Is water wet? Me: How tf godot teleported a mug of coffe to him?*

@strangerluvrr

3 жыл бұрын

He used the force.

@LeSpaghet

3 жыл бұрын

I still don’t know how he did that

@eobardthawn6903

3 жыл бұрын

@DB - 09SA 956706 Port Credit SS Although he burned Phoenix by throwing coffee at him? Lmao. I think that would at the very least revoke his coffee privileges In court. Furthermore, he could lose his job as well. However, thats only if the judge has an average IQ and not thirty points below average. Lol.

Here’s my issue with the whole water is wet argument. Many that side with water is wet use that a single water molecule touching another single water molecule makes the water wet. But wetness doesn’t just talk about water molecules and applies to literally ANY liquid substance. (Most have water molecules in them) but if you were to put your hand in melted iron (ignoring that your hand is probably burning off if you actually did this) when you took your hand out it would be considered wet despite no water being present. So just water having the ability to make something wet isn’t considering actual rules of chemistry and a bunch of other complicated boogaloo. Wetness is defined as “the ability of a liquid to adhere to the surface of a solid, so when we say that something is wet, we mean that the liquid is sticking to the surface of a material.” Water doesn’t adhere to itself because that’s a whole different definition entirely called cohesiveness. Which is literally just liquid preferring to stick with liquid of the same substance. “Cohesive forces are attractive forces within the liquid that cause the molecules in the liquid to prefer to stick together.” What makes something wet is a ratio balance between cohesiveness and adhesion. If the adhesion is greater than the cohesiveness then it becomes wet. But if cohesiveness is greater than adhesion then it’s actually dry. Which water has EXTREMELY strong cohesiveness so water is actually dry and not wet. scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=6097

@myau9912

2 жыл бұрын

How the hell did you go from "Wetness is defined as “the ability of a liquid to adhere to the surface of a solid, " and then arrive at "Water doesn’t adhere to itself, thus it's not wet?" By the first definition you just gave, water has wetness because it's a liquid that adheres to a surface...and then you just completely forgot that water is a liquid that sticks to things in the next sentence and called it dry.

@unstoppable6249

2 жыл бұрын

@@myau9912, water sticking to itself is cohesion not adhesion.

@myau9912

2 жыл бұрын

@@unstoppable6249 That's nice, but it adheres to other things with its wetness.

@unstoppable6249

2 жыл бұрын

@@myau9912, it adheres to other things, but what determines if a liquid is dry or wet is the ratio between adhesion and cohesion. If it is more adhesive than it is cohesive then it would be wet. If it is more cohesive than adhesive it is not wet. Water is much much more cohesive than it is adhesive, if you've ever watched water roll down a window you'd notice that while yes it is sticking to the window it is following the same path as the water droplet before it that had left some water in its trail. Sometimes it breaks off and then hits a dry spot on the window before getting back on the "water trail" but this is because the droplet gets to heavy and loses its tension. (Something that is an entirely different subject)

@myau9912

2 жыл бұрын

@@unstoppable6249 Good thing wetness has different levels then. Though I dont know why the fuck Im wasting time arguing with someone who says water is dry.

“Water makes things wet” My girlfriend: *insert monkey puppet meme*

"the molecules were touching eachother" Physics: "am I a joke to you?"

@autumn4442

3 жыл бұрын

Chemistry: "am I a joke to you?"

@user-yo7hz8gw4t

3 жыл бұрын

Well, if you say that the existence of a gap means they are not touching, then nothing is, therefore nothing can be wet. However, it should be obvious that what is commonly referred to as touching is, in fact, electron repulsion. Therefore, water molecules were indeed touching each other.

@spodreman7732

3 жыл бұрын

The repulsion of molecules creates the reaction that we know as touching

@ChristopherRu

3 жыл бұрын

Social distancing ;-;

@dinamosflams

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-yo7hz8gw4t yes he Said exactly that

OBJECTION! Since the surface molecules are touching water... *points finger* IT IS STILL WET! The example given by the defense is faulty because it ignores the fact that the inner molecules of the mug and the outer molecules of the mug are different. So, while only certain sides of the mug are wet, the entire molecules of those surfaces are also wet, just like the surface water molecules! Edit: After a long debate with BeelzebubFailure, we have come to an agreement. The following is a conclusion that we have both agreed upon, and that I feel sums up the debate well: Water, by itself and as a single molecule, is not intrinsically wet. It has no property that can make itself wet. However, water in the presence of other water molecules, given there is enough to consider some molecules as covered, those covered molecules become wet.

@Dctr-mg8km

3 жыл бұрын

HOLD IT! The definition given by the prosecution asserts that to be considered "wet" the object has to be "covered or saturated with water or another liquid". Since the water molecules are in contact with air they cannot be fully covered in other water molecules. True the inside of the mug is wet, but that doesn't mean that the mug in its entirety is wet!

@TheStickCollector

3 жыл бұрын

@@Dctr-mg8km HOLD IT! If the mug was underwater, there would be little to no air to separate the mug from the water, and ALL of the mug would be wet. Therefore, the water from the inside of the mug touches the water from the outside of the mug, making it W E T.

@2chill2bbored72

3 жыл бұрын

Yoshibro26 HOLD IT! THERES A GAP BETWEEN THE MOLECULES OF WATER. MEANING, THERES STILL AIR.

@thecabz2158

3 жыл бұрын

@@2chill2bbored72 HOLD IT Water is wet because i watch to much HENTAI AND U KNOW IT

@autumn64fromdeltarunechapter3

3 жыл бұрын

@@thecabz2158 HOLD IT! Hentai is drawn, so it has nothing to do with this case!

"Today I will finally prove to all the heathens who doubt what should be a universally accepted fact:" *CHUGS LIKE THERE'S NO TOMMOROW*

I love how well you write! This is the best objection thing I’ve ever seen.

"is water wet?" the judge five minutes later: *chuckles* I am in danger

@mingpingxie3563

3 жыл бұрын

*confused trampling in gallery*

I love when the judge just said "ehh at this point I don't even know what water is" 🤣😂😆

The moment The Fragrance of Dark Coffee kicks in ♪ ♥

I love how simple questions with a yes or no answer turn into a full blown court discussion and argument

"According to this Wikipedia article..." Teacher be like: "OBJECTION! Wikipedia is not a valid source, therefore his statement is invalid!"

@sorensharp4377

3 жыл бұрын

Wikipedia is the law of the universe!

@shantysencion8069

3 жыл бұрын

I was expecting them to say that too 😂

@hewhomustnotbenamed5912

3 жыл бұрын

@@sorensharp4377 agreed. Most people just don't know about the history function and the citations. Being able to see the past versions of a Wikipedia article and the citations makes my mind at rest since it would be significantly harder for a random editor to get away with a lie. I've only encountered one mistake (not lie) that I knew myself was wrong. It was a simple error where the time period in part of the article implied a different end point of said time then what was later stated in the article. And guess what. I just edited the time period to be correct (the point in time was correct).

@getspidered9757

3 жыл бұрын

HOLD IT, THATS WHERE EVERYONE GETS THEIR INFORMATION FROM.

*_OBJECTION!_* I’m afraid all the water molecules touching is _scientifically impossible._ Touch, as we understand it, is when the boundaries of two objects are in the same location... however, molecules _don’t have boundaries!_

@dumblenutz5561

3 жыл бұрын

@@timfoil big brain

@helloworld5219

3 жыл бұрын

@@timfoil help my brain is exploding

@robocatssj3theofficial

3 жыл бұрын

@Hello World Molecules do not connect entirely. Things called Electrons repel the two, like anything, while we still feel the touch. And if we can be considered set through the repelling, then water can still be wet going by the same definition.

@robocatssj3theofficial

3 жыл бұрын

@Hello World Wet*

@helloworld5219

3 жыл бұрын

@@robocatssj3theofficial wut

I do like how well this was formatted.

I love that this topic keeps getting revisited with new arguments.

This comment started out as a random comment, but I actually ended up coming up with a solid conclusion. So, if you want to read the TL;DR, it's there at the end. I suggest those who do read through my bullshit to read the TL;DR too, since I made one minor tweak to my conclusion. I'm very confident in my conclusion. I came here with the opinion that water isn't wet and it just makes other things wet, but came out thinking water is wet because it's making itself wet, but a singular water molecule on its own isn't wet. Wait a sec... Ok ok wait. Water itself isn't wet. It's other water that makes it wet. Then again, wetness is a quality of an object that isn't provided by itself, but by another substance, specifically a liquid. When I hold a wet object, it isn't the object itself that makes it wet, nor the liquid, it's the fact that the liquid is touching the object. In this case, you would call the object wet, but not the liquid wet. Technically, that doesn't bar the liquid from ever being considered wet. What happens when two liquids touch each other? Well, if you are willing to call a liquid an object, then it is wet. Wait. Object. Is liquid an object? Holy shit wait. I was about to conclude my thought, but now I have another. Ok, I'll conclude my thought, and then move on. If a liquid touches another liquid, possibly itself, then it is technically wet. If you have one lone liquid molecule, then it is not wet. Therefore, the answer to the question "Is water wet?" Is purely conditional, depending on if there are at least two water molecules touching each other. I rest my case. Now to ask if water is an object. Ok, so I searched up the definition of object, and water is an object. I rest my case, again. TL;DR: A water molecule being wet is purely conditional. A water molecule is only wet when it is being touched by one or more liquid molecules. I rest my case. But, if you want to go really specific, then nothing can be wet. Technically, according to a vsauce video I watched over a year ago and barely have any memory of, nothing is touching each other, so nothing can be wet. But, avoiding that random thing, since nobody's gonna get out of a pool soaked in water and argue that they're not wet, I stick with my original conclusion.

@tobie_one_kenobie2653

3 жыл бұрын

A single water molecule can't even be considered a liquid. Therefore water, in liquid form, is always wet

@digaddog6099

3 жыл бұрын

Two thoughts. First, is a molecule not always touching itself? Second, the reasoning that says nothing is touching itself redefines touching, it does not disprove the concept. Now, touching simply means making objects interact in close proximity such that they can not pass through each other

@WinCla

3 жыл бұрын

what the actual... wh... uh.. i can't read that i'm too lazy.

@BossuJmek2k18

3 жыл бұрын

OBJECTION You said that for something to be wet, it must be touched by *another* liquid. That means that if two water molecules touch each other they do not makes each other wet, that is because those two would basically form a bigger volume of water and thus making it the same liquid therefore not being any *another* liquid touching the original water molecules. So in conclusion i think that most liquids by themselves ( and some even in combination with each other because they combine ) are not wet. But if it's something as let's say water and oil, then yes you could call oil wet. This concludes my case

@beansnsteakmakepeoplequake8821

3 жыл бұрын

U

water isn’t wet because a liquid can’t saturate or cover itself. if i attempted to pour water on water, it would just create a larger amount of water

@engineergaming9188

3 жыл бұрын

can you prove that you didn't make it wetter?

@SnekkySnek

3 жыл бұрын

@@engineergaming9188 can you prove that they *did* make it wetter?

@fgvcosmic6752

3 жыл бұрын

Pour oil on water. Is it wet now?

@lankyboi2521

3 жыл бұрын

@FGV Cosmic sure

@SnekkySnek

3 жыл бұрын

@@fgvcosmic6752 no because oil floats on water

The amount of coffee being drunk by one guy is insane... and i can't get over the gulping sounds

What a Great topic for a 2 am existential crisis Video binge xD

I think something wet is something that could be dry. Clothes can be wet or dry. Water can't be dry. Therefore, to call it wet doesn't make sense, since it won't ever be dry.

@AlexS-sc3gb

3 жыл бұрын

What about ice?

@pheonyxior_5082

3 жыл бұрын

@@AlexS-sc3gb I don't know what you mean exactly but dry ice is solid carbon dyoxide, it's not water.

@jomillen5131

3 жыл бұрын

even if it won't ever get dry, it's still wet

@albertkops2459

3 жыл бұрын

So when water evaporates and leaves impurities that were dissolved in the water, are they wet despite being indistinguishable while water is present?

@mushroom6088

3 жыл бұрын

it cant get dry so it cant be wet??? that is the shittiest arguement ive ever seen

_"...at this point i don't even know what water is."_ LMFAOOOOO that was good

My class is about to have a debate about this too.thanks for the information

The entire court has attacked the judge 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Wet is a loosely defined word, and implies liquid covering something, to call liquid in its self not wet is a fallacy of definision not of reality.

@digaddog6099

3 жыл бұрын

Then what is your definition?

@TsarofTrolling

3 жыл бұрын

@@digaddog6099 something's wet if it feels wet

@ImNotEpix

3 жыл бұрын

@@TsarofTrolling exactly which means water is wet

@syundown6005

3 жыл бұрын

Exactly, adjectives don't define the root word itself. Flames can't be burnt.

@ImNotEpix

3 жыл бұрын

@@syundown6005 they can

Godot drank so much coffee his throat stopped working

i love this format

I need to finish my task but can't help to watch this , that was so cool !!

I can't even remember what side I'm on for this one-

0:38 How did you do that-

@tantris2876

3 жыл бұрын

Hold it!/Take That!

It began with "Is water wet?" To "Let's get te old man" Now i'm worring about him

Honestly learnt so much from this video

Are we NOT gonna talk about how they're drinking from the same freaking cup of coffee?!?!?!!?!!?!?!?

@jalma9643

3 жыл бұрын

That Sound really *Gay*

@Anotherchild_lol

2 жыл бұрын

You see the amount of coffee he'll ever have is "§" so it makes sense.

They should rename this to "KZread arguments in a nutshell"

@tantris2876

3 жыл бұрын

Nah this is a better title because it had a purpose of being a debate and not just some random KZread argument and KZread arguments aren’t like this, they’re way more toxic

God I love watching these when I should be sleeping

i keep watching videos like these and the way godot drinks his coffee just really makes me crave coffee. I haven't even played the games.

The definition of wet is inadequate. We do not apply the label “wet” to a liquid because of this exact problem: it makes no sense. Therefore, I propose a revision to the definition of the word “wet”: Describing a SOLID covered or saturated by water or another liquid. Thereby, at the molecular level, the word “wet” no longer applies because the state of matter of a substance is a property of many molecules acting together - solids are locked structures of molecules, liquids are loose associations, and gases looser associations still. Therefore, a single molecule of water is neither solid, liquid, or gas, and because it is not liquid, it cannot make other things wet, so water cannot make itself wet. You could claim that at the molecular level each molecule can be treated as a solid, but in that case because every molecule would be treated as solid there would be no agent to make other things wet. Ergo water is not wet because a) it is not a solid, and b) on the molecular level there is no such thing as states of matter. QED

@hahatdog2486

3 жыл бұрын

lmao the "it makes no sense" part got me

@calamity2956

3 жыл бұрын

Hey guys water is solid now

@justcallmekai1554

3 жыл бұрын

@@calamity2956 So just ice

@calamity2956

3 жыл бұрын

@@justcallmekai1554 I guess

@ohurana2294

2 жыл бұрын

Oh

man that guy with the white hair really loves his coffee

The argument: is water wet? me looking at the coffee mugs: the real question is, are they even drinking it?

I love how today i had a class about water and molecules, and this appears in recommended

I've had this exact argument with my brother before.

I just realized judge in trilogy is so older than judge on spirit of justice and dual destinies that look younger

I literally live for the characters saying *OBJECTION*

Phoenix should’ve said “YOU CANT HAVE DRY WATER”

@Shane-⁵²²⁹

3 жыл бұрын

You can, it exists.

@antoniomolina3612

3 жыл бұрын

@@Shane-⁵²²⁹ that silica water isn’t “dry water” it the most true/literal definition. They only call it that because it’s water and it appears to be dry. But underneath every silica coating the droplet, the liquid water is still there.

@antoniomolina3612

3 жыл бұрын

Btw, this statement, if you’re smart, debunks the entire “water is wet” argument. It’s so dumb. If i hire somebody, I should ask them if water is wet, and if they say yes then I know they have no critical thinking skills and I won’t hire them lol.

This is like Science just really intense

0:47 super sayain wario

Everyone: *argues whatever water is wet or not* Me: *WATER IS WATER!*

@josepoktovianus5866

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah and *THE FLOOR IS MADE OUT OF FLOOR*

I just love these videos...

merriam-webster defines "wet" as: consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water) by this definition, all water is wet, as water consists of itself, a liquid by stricter definitions such as google, almost all water is wet, as even if a single molecule of water is not inherently wet, multiple water molecules cover each other in water, which is a liquid, ergo the water becomes wet. it may not be completely covered by water but it doesn't have to be - you don't want until your entire shirt is drenched with water before you say it's wet, you say it's wet when you get water on it ergo by the strictest definitions, for all but highly specific (and likely purely scientific) contexts, water is wet. by less strict definitions, water is inherently wet.

@VimyGlide

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheChlanders i mean if you wanna go there then nothing can ever be wet because molecules never actually touch to begin with like i said, outside of highly specific and almost exclusively scientific contexts, water basically touches and thus is wet. you kind of just proved my point

@VimyGlide

3 жыл бұрын

@@montomotry5378 yeah, then water is wet, i agree

It was truly remarkable how he calmly argued that the outside of the cup was indeed not wet as the coffee had not touched that part, whereas the rest of us would’ve been too dumbfounded by the accusation to offer a rebuttal.

Finnaly an objection.Lol video that starts like an actual debate!

Probably the BEST objection.lol in history.

Plot twist: Mr. Godot 'Coffee' is beer

What if I said water was moist?

@user-bj1rt2tm7x

3 жыл бұрын

Yea

@kamikaze8105

3 жыл бұрын

Succulently moist

@cosmicexobyte6820

3 жыл бұрын

@@khajiitimanus7432 No-

god if you make a ‘godot drinking from his mug sound compilation’ I’d be set for life

This was so well done that, when Ema got on the stand, I was about to touch the Court Record button to look at her profile.

Her: "I like you because you're smart ;)" Me: * Title name *

Bro how many coffee does this guy have? And who keeps giving him more?!

5:02 rip judge

You have asked the mother of all science questions

Can we admire the fact that the coffee mug has infinite coffee?

The real question is how did he get a coffee mug out of thin air

@LeSpaghet

3 жыл бұрын

Yes I’m thinking the same thing. in fact I’m building a case against Phoenix to sue him for breaking the laws of physics

I love how formal it is compared to other objection.lols

Why are objection.lol videos so entertaining yet educational

Is oil oily?

@BURNTOASTSR

3 жыл бұрын

Oh NO 😬😬😬😬

@darkmiku2483

3 жыл бұрын

i mean people don't call oil oily , but if oil is found on their face , they would say the face is oily.

@_MNF__

3 жыл бұрын

Bruh this questions hit harder

@fikrifajarullah8489

3 жыл бұрын

ah shoot here we go again

@scottishscott3536

3 жыл бұрын

"Ah shit, here we go again"

Wouldn’t something have to be in a dryer surrounding to be called wet? Do you call something underwater wet before actually bringing it out of the water? What do you call it?

@gamecrab1015

3 жыл бұрын

Pink Soul Eating Monster it would have to be in a dryer surrounding to be called wet, like imagine you’re a fish and your only surrounding is water, you wouldn’t call anything wet

@gamecrab1015

3 жыл бұрын

Pink Soul Eating Monster :|

This vid: All serious Other vids of this: Very funky and random

Im waiting for the day i find myself in an argument so chaotic i can make my own objection.lol

"Scientific" answer: Something is wet if it is saturated in water, for example, a napkin with a drop of water in it is a little wet, in one spot. Let's say, the mass proportion of napkin-water is 100:1. If you soak it in water, it's very wet, let's say 1:1. At some point, there is more water than napkin, if you leave it submerged in a bucket, the proportion might be 1:10. Then, if you submerge a small napkin in the whole-ass ocean, you'd say it's absurdly wet, the proportion would be something like 1:1 trillion or something. Basically, as the proportion of thing-water gets smaller and smaller, it becomes wetter and wetter. To the point where it would be so small, it'd be basically zero. So, if the proportion of thing-water is zero, you'd have just water. So pure water is the wettest of substances. QED.

@strangerluvrr

3 жыл бұрын

Why do i feel so tired...?

@MagicToadSlime

3 жыл бұрын

Objection! The napkin stops being "wet" as defined long before it hits "zero" saturation. It would become napkin bits, then napkin particles, diluting into the water and becoming soup. Water doesn't wet itself, it can't touch itself or saturate itself.

@Buphido

3 жыл бұрын

REVISION! An object does not get "wetter" as it is surrounded by more water per se, it technically gets wetter as the substance gets saturated with water up to a maximum amount. A tissue submerged in the ocean is not wetter than a tissue submerged in the bathtub. And, by the very nature of wetness, a wet, with water saturated substance will still contain that water as it is raised out of the water, as the water will cling to it, making it wet in the first place. This is difficult to simulate with water, as raising a ball of water out of a bathtub without outside interference is nigh impossible. Or so it would seem, since attempting this in an area without the influence of gravity will lead to the water forming a big floating ball of itself due to the surface tension of water, which implies the substance in question in fact retaining the water it was soaked in and being wet. So water, as a substance absorbing the water it is soaked in instead of repelling it, is wet.

@DarkKnight-ty7mm

3 жыл бұрын

But everything has a specific capacity to absorb water. So it will stop at some point that's why the ratio won't be zero. Only if I understood whatever you wrote correctly since my phy and chem are drowning after lackdown.

@MediHusky

3 жыл бұрын

Which is more wet, fresh or salt water.

Objection! The definition of water is touching or SATURATED with water, and water itself is 100% saturated with water, therefore, water is wet.

@deltainfinium869

3 жыл бұрын

OBJECTION! The definition of saturated is, according to google "holding as much water or moisture as can be absorbed; thoroughly soaked." However, water cannot absorb water, therefore could never be wet.

@gingerinajacket8519

3 жыл бұрын

@@deltainfinium869 water has to, even in solid form, be wet, because of *dry ice* which is ice... *THAT CONTAINS NO WATER!!!*. Dry ice implies the existence of wet ice, which is what normal ice is! Because of that, each water molecule should act as a container for all other water molecules too!

I’ve never thought about it so hard

why is this so entertaining

Let’s say I poured some water into a mug, about halfway full. If I pour some more water into that mug, does the water that was already there become more saturated? No. It’s just a larger sum of water. Also, it is impossible for water to cover itself, because water will always adapt to its surroundings and take on new forms. Water isn’t layered, like solids. It’s one mass of a certain amount of water. Therefore, because it does not cover or saturate itself, _water is not wet!_

@pedobearthebeast4939

3 жыл бұрын

If I put an apple in a bucket of water and it is saturated with water and then I pour more water in the bucket, has the apple become more saturated? No, because it’s already been saturated with as much water as currently possible, as would be the water molecules in the water.

@gamecrab1015

3 жыл бұрын

Pedobear TheBeast then why wouldn’t the molecules repel the rest of the water like the apple does

@Connor_Kirkpatrick

3 жыл бұрын

But that argument doesn’t make sense on a molecular level, because that would imply that everything covers itself at all times.

@kiwi_2_official

Жыл бұрын

can you prove the pre existing mass isnt wet already

At first I thought water isn’t wet itself, but makes things wet... But then I realized, *how can water make other things wet if it isn’t wet itself?*

@lintyscorpion2692

3 жыл бұрын

The same way that fire sets other things on fire, but isn't itself on fire

@theaviator1152

3 жыл бұрын

@@lintyscorpion2692 Fire burns what it touches yeah? And fire touches itself? Therefore fire is burnt.

@lintyscorpion2692

3 жыл бұрын

@@theaviator1152 No to be burned is to be damaged or injured by heat/fire. It's possible to touch fire without being burned. It can burn, but isn't itself burned.

@theaviator1152

3 жыл бұрын

@@lintyscorpion2692 Okay, perhaps in that sense ‘burnt’ isn’t the correct word, but one definition of ‘burn’ is ‘be in flames.’ So in that sense, fire is burning as in ‘producing flames and heat while consuming a material such as coal or wood’ AND as in ‘being in flames.’ Therefore fire is *burnt* in multiple definitions (including the one of being in flames, which is the one relevant to my argument).

@lintyscorpion2692

3 жыл бұрын

@@theaviator1152 It is only burning in the verb action, which is completely different then being burnt itself. Burning meaning it is burning something else. Which is completely irrelevant to my original statement. Water isn't wet the same reason that fire isn't on fire.

*he got em with the surface claim*

Best Silliest Recommendations ever!

My girlfriend and I argued about this on date night. ... I can assure you that she was certainly NOT wet.

"Water molecules are touching each other" Me, who knows that there is space between molecules: You may have outsmarted me but I have outsmarted your outsmarting

@kirtil5177

3 жыл бұрын

by same logic nothing is wet, because everything is made of molecules that all have space between each other

@agenti4734

3 жыл бұрын

@@kirtil5177 yeah but I don't think water is wet. If they truly were toucing each other they would be considered wet. Also, water can't be wet if it can't be dry

@kirtil5177

3 жыл бұрын

@@agenti4734 sinces molecules cant truly contact each other, touching just means pushing molecules at each other until they repel each other because of the 'Pauli Exclusion Principle'. that means 2 or more molecules of water 'touching' each other makes both of them wet, and a single water molecule is dry

@agenti4734

3 жыл бұрын

@@kirtil5177 but can water be dry?

@kirtil5177

3 жыл бұрын

@@agenti4734 yeah as i said technically a single random molecule of water is dry, as long as it doesnt have other water molecules next to it

I cant watch anymore of these, I’m losing brain cells