Talk:Wetting

message: Would it be safe to say that wetting is a liquid equivalent of cold welding in that both occur when the surface of one material bonds to that of the other chemically rather than simply being pressed next to eachother? —BenFrantzDale 17:08, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cold welding 

message: It is common to say that any object "wants" something if it lowers it's energy. Objects do not have minds, but that's just a simple way of expressing the effect of lowering enery.
Ivopeters 08:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Needs editing 

message: Given that the contact angle is the angle between the tangent to the surface of the liquid at the point where all three phases meet and the surface of the solid (as denoted by \theta_c in Figure 4 of the article).  I'm a little confused by the following excerpt from the article:
When a contact line advances, covering more of the surface with liquid, the contact angle is increased...A receding interface likewise has a contact angle that is reduced...
Wouldn't the contact angle decrease as the contact line advances, and the contact angle increase as the contact line recedes?  Currently, I don't have access to the referenced material, so I can't check for the explanation.
--Jgrunschel (talk) 07:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re:  Needs editing 

message: "There are two main types of solid surfaces with which liquids can interact. Traditionally, solid surfaces have been divided into high energy solids and low energy types. The relative energy of a solid has to do with the bulk nature of the solid itself. Solids such as metals, glasses, and ceramics are known as 'hard solids' because the chemical bonds that hold them together (e.g. covalent, ionic, or metallic) are very strong. Thus, it takes a large input of energy to break these solids so they are termed “high energy.” Most molecular liquids achieve complete wetting with high-energy surfaces."
Could someone please briefly explain (and possibly re-phrase) that last sentence to me ? It seems to say that if water, say, is poured on to a 'hard-solid' like glass, the glass will become completely wet. Which can't be right. Help ! Gnu Ordure (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does glass get completely wet ? 

message: Could we possibly add a "In popular culture" section for the mention of the water wetness debate? Dragon Curve (talk) 02:21, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Is water wet" debate 

message: The user Nadish21 appears to be using this page as a vehicle to promote his own scientific work. The equations from the Jasper-Anand paper were added to Wikipedia within 10 days of its publication. Unknown users have repeatedly rolled back the efforts of others to remove the section from the page. 
Although the publication is peer reviewed, it is really questionable to list it as an important result in a field that is at least a century old. As a researcher in this field I find the paper to be of poor quality and there are many other well regarded papers that far deserve to be mentioned on this page (to give one example: 10.1063/1.1563828).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.6.151.208 (talk) 30 May 2021 
Reply: The justification for removing this section does a disservice to the field of wetting for the following reasons:
1. The Young-Dupre equation, which has been a well established theory for over two centuries, also happens to be incompatible with the First Law of Thermodynamics.
2. Existing theories such as the Young-Dupre equation or the Modified Young's Equation do not agree with peer reviewed experimental data on predicting the contact angle of small sessile droplets.
3. Existing theories predict incorrectly the magnitude and sign of the line tension term.
4. The Young-Dupre equation fails to predict contact angle hysteresis for sessile droplets.
In contrast, the section which is being proposed to be deleted:
1. Agrees with the First Law of Thermodynamics. 
2. Agrees with experimental results over 14 orders of magnitude in droplet volume.
3. Correctly predicts the sign and magnitude of the line tension term at the three phase boundary.
4. Correctly predicts contact line hysteresis.
Instead of self-censoring this section, would it not be more prudent for the readers to decide for themselves between theories which do not agree with experiment and those that do?
Finally, passing on conjecture and one's opinions, without hard scientific evidence that disproves this particular theory, should not be the basis for censoring this section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:B01:5880:20C2:CA26:3A59:B101 (talk) 22:24, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on Jasper-Anand section 

message: Some months ago I wrote ("Discussion on Jasper-Anand section") that a user was seemingly promoting his own academic work, adding equations from a paper days after its publication. 
Someone has continued to surreptitiously add the work of Jasper and Anand to this Wikipedia page, now in a section titled "A Generalized Model for the Contact Angle of Droplets on Flat and curved surfaces". Apart from what seems to be a shameless act of self-promotion from someone who calls himself the progenitor of the Jasper-Anand equation), there is no really compelling reason why this paper should be featured over papers from more established names in wetting such as Tadmor, Extrand and so forth. 
In an earlier comment an unsigned commenter claims that Jasper and Anand's theory agrees with experimental results over 14 orders of magnitude and correctly predicts the sign and magnitude of line tension. These claims are wrong  because the order of magnitude of the line tension is a notoriously unsolved problem (see B M Law et al https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/53476/6/Line%20tension%20Prog%20Surf%20Sci%20Submission%20BMLaw%20082016.pdf) whose experimental measurements notably conflict with one another. 103.252.202.193 (talk) 06:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  More self-promotion on "A Generalized Model for the Contact Angle of Droplets on Flat and curved surfaces"