Talk:Properties of water
|↓||Skip to table of contents||↓|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Properties of water article.|
|WikiProject Chemicals / Core||(Rated B-class, Top-importance)|
|Threads older than 240 days may be archived by.|
hazard -- avalanche
I have added "avalanche" to the hazards of water -- as snow. Avalanches strike with little warning, and people caught in them are trapped so that they can easily die of suffocation or hypothermia. To be sure, avalanches do not happen on flat terrain, but they are common enough to take a toll of lives.
bogus graph 1/4 way down, rhs ?
this graph -
1/4 way down, rhs, makes no sense; the small curve fits with the data in the table but what is the large curve ? no sign of any explanation for sudden drop of density @ 0 celsius, below this the curve doesn't fit the data in the table.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 02:23, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- The graph reads "Density of ice and water" and combines water to the right and ice to the left. Ice properties are described in its own article, not here. Materialscientist (talk) 03:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
In the first 10 seconds of reading this article, I tripped over a ridiculous claim. So, assuming that its generally that poorly written, I figured I should start an Error section and those more inclined to fix the rubbish accumulating here can.
- The Table claims that the molar mass of water is "18.01528(33)". This is wrong. Oxygen has an atomic mass of 15.999(4), H is 1.008(1). If I am able to count, those both are THREE significant digits to the right of the decimal point. If you don't understand the problem reporting 5 places when it just isn't possible to know more than 3, then you shouldn't be editing this. (I am not saying that, for a particular sample of water, 5 (or more) places aren't MEASURABLE. I am saying reporting that value is at best misleading (since it can ONLY refer to a specific sample or set of samples) and so is technically WRONG (it isn't "the value" for an arbitrary sample).) Additionally, a citation should be provided for this value.Abitslow (talk) 14:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
I think editors interested in this topic would be appreciated if they could give opinions on whether this is topic of any worth. Specifically, I think the test is whether this topic, Liquid crystal water, would be worth paragraphs of coverage at this or another mainspace article. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)