View Single Post
Old 01-05-2009, 07:57 AM   #29
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Water is not made of oxygen and hydrogen. Water is is made up of many molecules containing two hydrogens and one oxygen. Additionally, there are multiple types of "water", such as "salt", "mineral", "rain", and "muddy", among others.
Yes, but is it not fact that "water" contains two hydrogen and one oxygen?

I say water in the sense of pure, filtered, plain old water. Placing dirt, salt, etc is arguing semantics, as it is still water with additives unless that water has been fundamentally changed.

As far as I know, salt and dirty don't fundamentally rearrange the molecules that make up water. If they did, by definition, it would no longer be water. It would be a different substance entirely.

I'm just working off of the top of my head here, so feel free to correct me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Additionally, "water" is just the english word for this mostly-clear generally consumable liquid. Yes, some people cannot consume water, they tend to die quickly, but not always. But anyway, you could say that all words for water mean the same thing, but some cultures have different words for choppy water or dirty water, does that make the truth of the water different?
And Eskimos have like, 50 words for snow.

While the snow may be different levels of frozen, cold, hard, soft, etc, it is still frozen water. The different densities tend to have more to do with the percentage of water density.

That does not change the fact that it is essentially frozen, and packed together water molecules that change density depending upon environmental factors.

Just like you example with water, just calling all these variations "snow" is incredibly general. But the word has more of a social meaning than the scientific meaning of Snow as a type of precipitation in the form of crystalline water ice, consisting of a multitude of snowflakes that fall from clouds.

Calling it something else does not fundamentally change the way it is created. Only the way we perceive it. And what we generally all perceive on a basic level would be "frozen water (translate to any language you want)" I'd assume.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
It would be more correct to say: "water contains hydrogen and oxygen" as the statement is vague enough to apply to both it's chemical composition, and what may actually be held within the water, but not be part of the water's composition.
Depends on what you are calling "water"

If by water you mean the entire ocean, or a lake, then there would be more than hydrogen and oxygen. But, I believe Ender was speaking more for plain water. Again, it would not be technically water if something had fundamentally changed its molecular composition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
For example: You say water is made of hydrogen and oxygen, I say, everything is made of energy, what comes between your perceptions and the energy state are irrelevant, water is made of energy. Who is right? Is my truth different from yours because my understanding of the makeup of the universe is different?
I'd say it is "correct" from a different angle. It isn't so much a different understanding as it is you putting Ender's understanding under a stronger microscope.

While it is correct to say our arm is covered in skin to protect our body, it would also be correct to say that your arm is made up of slow moving energy that has formed a pinkish matter over more slowed energy that has formed muscle tissue and bone.

Its just a progression downwards. Like Snow.

Snow

|
V

Frozen Water

|
V

Ice particles made of compressed 2 parts hydrogen and one part oxygen molecule.

|
V

etc as far down as we can find

|
V

Energy

|
V

Anything lower.

While going down the branch to describe snow, they are all technically correct. None of them are incorrect if that is the answer you want.

I'd be correct in saying that its Ice particles made of compressed 2 parts hydrogen and one part oxygen molecule, and you'd be correct by just going to the answer all and saying everything is made of energy, for example.

But, again, choosing the answer and which to stick to is more for social interaction purposes. Scientifically, I'd presume they are all acceptable answers for the definition of snow.

Unless, of course, all of the above is the construct of humans incorrectly trying to assume we know anything. In which case, all of the above are neither correct nor incorrect.

Last edited by True_Avery; 01-05-2009 at 08:18 AM.
True_Avery is offline   you may: