is water more than the sum of its parts ?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by thinking, Feb 6, 2009.

  1. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
    but for me , thinking , I said burn , not fire , but burn

    regardless

    when we look into the subject deeper we come up with a liquid
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Congratulations on missing the point.

    There is no omphaloskepsis required. Water is precisely the sum of it's parts, no more, no less.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. thinking Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,504
    so you are telling me that particles are a liquid , hmm.. I mean particles , as in atomic particles , as in H and O2 , which are particles , are then broken down to a liquid state but at the sametime are stable in their particle form , but are able to have a liquid form and to have a distinction still present as to distinguish between H and O2 atomicly

    and ALL this going on at the same time !!!! ?

    hardly
     
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2009
  8. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Half of this post is gibberish, to be perfectly honest, and makes zero sense.

    What you're saying bears absolutely no resemblance to what I'm telling you.

    "Liquid" has no meaning when you're discussing single particles, it's a property of an ensemble of particles.

    What I have said however, is that all of the properties of water can be accurately intuited by considering the properties of Oxygen and Hydrogen, and considering the differences between them.
     

Share This Page