Discussion in 'Chemistry' started by lixluke, Jun 7, 2006.
the deepest blues are black...
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
You repeat the same question that has already been answered.
Therefore, you get the same answer
A: What is pure clean water?
B: Water that does not have anything but 100% H2O in it.
A: What is pure clean water.
B: Water that does not have anything but 100% H2O in it.
Looks like you completely missed the point. Again. Where did I ask for a definition of pure water? Your answers, by the way, amounted to "it's obvious" and circular reasoning.
You are too blind to even know the only question you ask over and over.
Does that look like a request for a definition of pure water to you? Can you read? If you're using the terms "clean" and "pure" interchangeably, then there's your problem right there.
If you missed my point, I'll explain it here. I didn't think much of your comparison between pure water and a clean apple. The term "pure" has a simple and unambiguous definition that you've already repeated many times: if a sample of a substance is pure there are no other substances (or impurities) in that sample. Obviously, it doesn't make much sense to apply this adjective to any compound or mixture (like an apple).
The meaning of "clean" is a little ambiguous. Generally, applied to a food product, it means that it contains no harmful substances (like bacteria, pollution) or certain harmless substances that, for one reason or another (eg. it affects the taste or appearance), you still don't want in your food (eg. soil).
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't use these terms interchangeably. What I was trying to get out of you was why you considered pure water to be superiour to impure water. If you use "clean" as a synonym for "pure" (instead of its usual meaning), you still haven't explained anything.
I also gave at least one example of what could validly be called impure water that most people don't have a problem with. Here's a small list of such drinks:
• Orange juice
• Coca Cola
... basically almost any beverage on the market today. Would you distill wine? Then why would you distill mineral water?
Yes it does.
A pure apple is an apple that is 100% apple.
Anything that is not part of the apple, such as chemicals and dirt does not make a pure clean apple.
No it is not. I made the definition very clear.
You have no point.
You simply avoid the point, and repeat something that I have already explained over and over.
1. Pure and clean is being used interchangably in this case. Stop trying to do otherwise.
2. I have defined what is pure and clean H2O a number of times, and you still question a definition as if you do not know what you are talking about.
3. An apple can be defined as 100% pure existing in extremely pure conditions such as H2O.
4. Any impurity in a substance whether H2O or an apple is a deviation from its 100% purity.
Keep arguing this if you wish. I have already explained it over and over, but you co not know how to read.
I'm going to re-enter this debate because i just plain don't like you anymore cool skill Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Define an apple? it is a mixture of organic molecules, water and many other things out there... How can you get a pure apple? Its like me saying my computer is pure because it doesn't have anything except computer in it... which is just ridiculous.
A Clean apple however is an apple that is only apple, nothing else in it, a clean computer is a computer that has no foriegn substances on it and sounds alot less ridiculous.
Pure water is water that has no impurities in it but i think your taking the word a bit too seriously. The impurities that you are talking about are vital minerals that are needed on a daily basis.
I just found out by talking to a doctor that the current concept of drinking as much water as possible a day is very unhealthy and she quoted a problem that exists in the worlds defence forces where by soldiers drink too much water but aren't replacing the important electrolytes and minerals they've just expended. They are also washing away the current minerals and electrolytes in their system because of drinking excessive amounts water. Subsequently they start feeling groggy and aren't able to do expected physical tasks.
What i can draw from that is that if you drink too much water that doesn't replace what you need/expend then your not exactly living healthy.
But like i said, if you want to live a healthy life you must have a balance of everything, you just don't seem to grasp that concept very well, so its at your own detriment that you drink distilled water.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Just adding to what i just said, i found an important definition of pure on the internet where i quote
So don't use the word pure when talking about apples because its in the wrong context
I know what you mean, but I still think you're using the term inappropriately. Let's accept this for a minute. Then why can you talk about "pure apples" but not "pure mineral water". Both are mixtures, and you seem to be making the term "pure" redundant if it can be applied to anything. Also look at that list of impure water products in my last post (that you conveniently ignored). Why is mineral water the odd one out?
Incidentally, you'll make any physicist's day if you talk about "pure white light."
I do not agree with your "pure = clean" equivalence, and I've only seen you use it. You do realize that you can't change anything just by redefining a few terms, right? You're trying to use the fact that "clean" usually has positive connotations to support your arguments. This isn't logic; it's wordplay.
You are advocating that pure water is superiour (whatever that means) to mineral water based on some vague intuition that it just *must* be true, and you want to accuse others of having no point?
You keep missing the point and putting words in my mouth.
The original question I asked was this:
Did I give any hint I that I didn't know what distilled water was? You still seem to be unable to give a direct answer to this question. You have tried to avoid this in at least two ways:
a) Defining terms, as if the answer to this question followed obviously from the definitions.
b) Vague indications of a link between pure water and clean food.
Try giving a direct answer for a change.
Then justify why food that lives up to your definition of "clean" is superiour. Objects that live up to your new definition of "clean" don't automatically inherit the properties of objects that live up to some alternative definition of "clean." This is a classic error in logic. If I define "table = car," can I now drive my dining table to university every morning?
No, I'm not impressed with your wordplay.
An apple contains a lot of water, but it is not pure H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>(l)</sub>. But you define it as pure apple as long as there's nothing that isn't apple in it. Mineral water is not pure H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>(l)</sub>, but it can be defined as pure mineral water if there's nothing that isn't mineral water in it. Did you have a point?
This isn't news to anyone. I'm asking "so what?"
I agree that this is getting ridiculous. Ultimately, you drink whatever you want to drink, for whatever rational or irrational reasons.
Simple again I repeat myself because you completely refuse to acknowledge the point.
Clean and pure are being used interchangeably.
Whatever inappropriate wordplay you may think this may be is irrelevant.
100% clean. 100% pure. Same thing.
You continue caviling a pint that has been repeated over and over and over.
Keep caviling it, and it will never ever ever change.
I am not putting any words in anybody’s mouth. You have been arguing the same pointlessness over and over and over again. No matter how many times I have answered it over and over again.
It is obvious you have no clue what you are talking about as you continue to repeat the same nonsense circularly as if it will bring the discussion anywhere.
Ultimately you have no point whatsoever.
So, cool skill, why would anyone want to drink pure water AND take mineral supplements when they can just drink mineral water on its own? What are the advantages of pure water?
What point? I'm still waiting for you to make a point. It's really not difficult. Now that you know that everyone knows the definition of pure, please provide a direct answer to this question:
Why drink distilled water?
Nobody said anything about taking miniral supplimants.
All the minirals you need come from food. Good miniral suppliments are always good.
The purer the water, the less contaminated it is with other substances.
Such substances are not necessary. Just extra garbage.
Not that it will kill you.
But if I had a choice between purer water and less pure water, I would go with the purer one.
Even if there was any validity to the ideas of water making cells explode, it probably would not happen unless all you do is drink nothing but 100% pure water over a long period of time.
Most people do not do this. They drink lots of water, and eat food.
Don´t you worry about food then? The purer the meat or bread the better? It is easier to see when water is contaminated. Solid food has so many chemicals in it that I sometimes wonder how does meat tastes, not this meat-like-chemical-filled-thinky.
So if you don´t worry about that "contamination" why worry about water?
The minerals in mineral water are not garbage. they are good for you.
Fair enough, that's your choice
Do you understand the process of diffusion, whereby molecules will travel from an area of high concentration to an area of low concentration to even out the concentration?
Very true. Lots of impure/mineral water.
Where did anybody mention anything about meat?
I said food. That could be all kinds of things.
Either way, even good food like fruits and vegetables can be full of chemicals.
The best way is to have pure grown chemical free vegitation.
Just an example. Same can be said about vegetables, the question remains.
Sorry. But this whole conversation is just so damned funny.
Round and round the mulberry bush and all that.
I can't help but to chime in with this:
The Muffin Man is seated at the table in the laboratory of the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen... Reaching for an oversized chrome spoon he gathers an intimate quantity of dried muffin remnants and brushing his scapular aside procceds to dump these inside of his shirt...
He turns to us and speaks:
"SOME PEOPLE LIKE CUPCAKES BETTER. I FOR ONE CARE LESS FOR THEM!"
Arrogantly twisting the sterile canvas snoot of a fully charged icing anointment utensil he poots forths a quarter-ounce green rosette (oh ah yuk yuk... let's try that again...!) He poots forth a quarter-ounce green rosette near the summit of a dense but radiant muffin of his own design.
Later he says:
"SOME PEOPLE... SOME PEOPLE LIKE CUPCAKES EXCLUSIVELY, WHILE MYSELF, I SAY THERE IS NAUGHT NOR OUGHT THERE BE NOTHING SO EXALTED ON THE FACE OF GOD'S GREY EARTH AS THAT PRINCE OF FOODS... THE MUFFIN!"
There's more. But that's the relevant portion.
Irrelevant. Nobody is talking about muffins.
A bad example.
And yes I mentioned the same can be said about vegetales.
Separate names with a comma.