• mathemachristian [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    In this case human dwellings would be built to accomodate for this, since it’s basically impossible to wipe up any water puddle. Builders would have to come up with some technology (drains in every room, floor heating as the norm to evaporate the 2µm water film etc.) or risk water damage. So you’d never have to wipe up a puddle since your apartment would have been built in a way that allows for the cleaning of water in other ways.

  • Admetus@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 day ago

    Sounds like a lot less cleaning in the house as it would just evaporate in less than a minute?

    • REDACTED@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      High humidity tends to ruin a lot of houses/construction materials over time, but you’ll likely first notice random spores

      • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        I mean you can just ventilate whenever you spill something.

        The larger problem would be the entire water-based ecosystem.

        • Admetus@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          We need xkcd to explain what would happen on a large scale if water was like this.

    • ryedaft@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’d be awful. You want the stuff in water out of your house, not precipitated all over the floor.

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Minerals, dirt, pathogens, etc.

          If you wash your ear raw chicken (you shouldn’t), that splatter would be much more evenly spread over every surface it lands on.

          • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Well yeah, I’m not advocating we convert to surface-tensionless water, here. I’m just pointing out the flaw in this meme’s logic.

            Now on to serious questions, wtf is an ear chicken?

  • Wilzax@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    You could also clean it by putting a cloth in the lowest point it would run to so this sounds like a win to me

    • yuri@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      i think without surface tension it would also just fall out of the cloth as soon as you lift it, because nothing would wick against gravity. in fact of your floor is pourous at all, i reckon the water would just immediately all flow further down and you’d be left with a dry floor.

  • Gwaer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Wouldn’t it just be a superfluid at that point? Those things are ungovernable. We’d have way more problems that just spilled puddles. They crawl out of the beakers on their own. It’d be an absolute nightmare.

    My bad superfluids are 0 viscosity not surface tension carry on we’re safe.

    • CarrotsHaveEars@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      I heard about superfluid crawling out of a container. But I wonder in this case, what works the fluid against the gravity upward the wall of the container?