discuss

rise faggot
sage

>>713839596
Considering how fat Ice Cube is, the glass will explode.

>>713839596
It will neither rise nor fall.

>>713839596
Neither. The ice is already in the water

fall

Stays the same level obviously due to water displacement.

Neither. But you will get more water

Fall because ice has alower density than water

ice has air in it so if it melts the air will get out meaning the water level falls but then again the ice is not wholly submerged so idk my man

>>713839596
fall, slightly. water-ice actually takes up more room than water

>>713839596
stays the same. the water will leak through the sides of the glass, that's why when you leave a glass of sweet tea sit the sides get wet. it's just the way things are.

>>713839829
opposite is the case you retard

Fall. Water expands when frozen, so the ice takes up more volume than the equivalent water. Even if it is not fully submerged

>>713839596

It depends if the glass is half empty or half full

>>713839596
The water level remains the same when the ice cube melts. A floating object displaces an amount of water equal to its own weight. Since water expands when it freezes, one ounce of frozen water has a larger volume than one ounce of liquid water

The buoyant force acting upward upon the ice cube is equal to the force of gravity acting on the total volume of water displaced by the cube. As the cube melts, the force necessary to maintain the equilibrium of its buoyancy decreases, and the total volume of water displaced decreases. The volume of water in the glass, therefore, does not change as long as the ice cube is a solid homogenous volume.

File: OC I see what you did there dog.jpg (25KB, 347x385px)

25KB, 347x385px

Oh, I get it... 'cause if the water level doesn't go up people won't drown from global warming! You're so clever you solved all our problems!

^Because of course no animal would migrate differently, no plants would be unable to grow in their native climates, and nobody would choke on the pollution that caused it.

Thanks anon. Your logic has saved us all.^

>>713839996
>The water level remains the same when the ice cube melts. A floating object displaces an amount of water equal to its own weight. Since water expands when it freezes, one ounce of frozen water has a larger volume than one ounce of liquid water

this, theres nothing to discuss, because discussion dont change the facts.

could some anon conduct an irl experiment

Depends on if anon lives on flat erf under glass dome like snow globe.

>>713840187
yes because we are certified scientists...

Why would you believe anything that is said on 4chan?

>>713840253
implying that anything is real and not a simulation

>>713839596
Floating?
How much of it is above the water level?
How much freeboard?

>>713839596
>H2O maximum density = 1 gram per cubic at 4 degrees Celcius
>Expands above and below
>Volume of solid water (aka. ice) displacing equal volume of water
>Ice melts into same volume of water it's displacing
>Add sugar and yeast and hops to liquid water
>Let sit and ferment
>??? (or some other science shit)
>BEER!!! = profit

Old question to trick the idiots who failed grade 8 science class.

>>713840377
it is constant as long as the ice is from the same water as the glass

Ice has a lower density so it should fall further more a certain amount of water will evaporate. Leaving fewer water molecules total. Clouds come from somewhere. If you seal the container and take careful enough measurements the minute levels of radiation in everything will change some of the molecules to other substances. So once again down. Just make sure you measure the meniscus at the same place every time.

>>713839899
Freeze a billion molecules of H20
Thaw a billion molecules of H20
Still have a billion molecules of H20

lrn2logic faggot

>>713839596
Who cares?

>>713840031
And glaciers wouldn't melt either, creating run-off that fills the oceans, raising the sea level. So brilliant!

a quick google search said the level wont change

It will lower because ice is less dense than water. Meaning the ice cube is bigger than the water you will get when it melts which mean since less space is being taken up the water level will fall. Of course either way though their is still the same amount of water in the glass.

>>713840126
>larger volume
I think you're confusing volume and mass
The volume of water will change depending upon temperature, but the mass will not

>>713839596
It will stay the same because the volume of the contents doesn't change

>>713840798
You are retarded. The exact reason you gave is why the water level will rise. The ice sits on top of the water, because it's less dense, as it melts into the water, the water level will rise.

Dumb fuck.

>>713840614
How retarded are you

Pretty fuckin sad people don't know the water level will go down. Fill a glass of ice water to the brim, and as the ice melts, the water level will drop.
Mr. Wizard taught me that when I was 7 years old.

File: ice-troll.jpg (471KB, 764x1080px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 764x1080px

>>713839596
The ice will soak up all the water making the cube bigger.

>>713839596
There's a reason water displacement is measured in tons, i suggest you look it up.

>>713840614
Your bait is shit, but h2o molecules form a lattice when the temp gets to freezing, so that the water takes up more room as a solid than a liquid. Nearly every other substance in the universe takes up less space as a solid than as a liquid, which is why water is so unique. If you had an ocean of liquid methane or any other liquid, as it froze, the frozen bits would sink to the bottom. Where they would stay frozen. Not like water, which in solid form floats instead of sinks. Can you imagine a world where in lakes and oceans, frozen water sinks to the bottom. It would be a very different world.
1/0 for making me reply.

>>713840614
retard

Though I would ask wether >>713839899
is true.

Does solid water take up more space than liquid water? Thats the answer to the question, right?

>>713840980
Really?

So, freezing and thawing H20 magically creates new H20.

Cool science, bro.

>>713841567
good explination, I was wondering this

My guess is about 15% chance you got trolled

>>713839596
Since the ice cube is merely solid water molecules, the ice cube will melt to the level and maintain the depth as displaced by the density of the ice cube.

>>713839596
it stays the same

File: 1473964725871.jpg (67KB, 612x720px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 612x720px

>>713841702
it takes up more volume

nigger

>>713839596
It will rise. Not because of the ice cube turning to water (ice is more voluminous than water and ofcourse fucking water displacement) but rather because heat makes things expand. The effect will hardly be noticeable though.

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_1480315921633.png (208KB, 807x935px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 807x935px

>>713839596
It will fall.

It is the law of buoyancy... For ANY object to float, it must displace a larger mass of water than itself. This means that the ice is less dense. Density is a function of mass/volume.

When the ice is displacing that amount of water tland then melts, the volume decreases as the density increases.

Water level is a volume, it therefore decreases.

>>713839672
This, nothing is changing other than the state of matter

>>713839923
>ice more dense than water

You realize that water expands (is less dense) when it freezes, right?

>>713839596
it will fall
water - Density = 1.0 g/mL
ice - Density = 0.92 g/mL

source http://chemistry.elmhurst.edu/vchembook/122Adensityice.html

>>713842165
Except also temperature. Things expand when they get hotter and shrink when cooled.

It will fall: the molecular structure of ice causes it to be denser than liquid water; ergo, a certain number of atoms of frozen water will fill up a greater volume of space than an equal number of atoms of liquid water.

Freezing an amount of water increases its volume by around 8%, as I recall -- it's why boulders can be cracked by water getting into gaps and then freezing.

>>713842012
and what about the allegations that ice (solid water) takes up more volume than water(liquid water)?

Water level doesn't change, do a fucking experiment and see for yourself.

>>713842336
denser = greater volume?

or is ice LESS dense?

>>713842372
He mentioned them.
"ice is more voluminous than water"

>>713842478
Ice is less dense.

>>713842372
Water displacement is based on mass, not volume. (it's why ships sink deeper in water when loaded while they do not change their shape when loaded)

>>713842323

Except for water, which expands when cooled.

>>713841614
>Does solid water take up more space than liquid water?
Yes.

>Thats the answer to the question, right?
No, because your buoyancy force is equivalent to the weight of the water you displace.

So say ice takes up a million times as much room as water. If you freeze an gallon of water, you get a million gallons of ice. This ice still weighs as much as a gallon of water. If we hold it out the water, it's pulled down by its own weight, which is the same as a gallon of water. Say it's being held completely under water: it's going to be pushed up by the weight of a million gallons of displaced water, and it's going to be pushed down by its weight of one gallon of water.

So what if it was floating, and wasn't going up or down? It would weigh the same as one gallon of water, so this force would need to be countered by an equal buoyancy force. The equal buoyancy force would have to be created by displacing one gallon of water, which is the same exact amount of water as the ice was made from at the start.

For any liquid that creates whateverbergs, the whateverlevel always stays the same regardless of the whateverbergs melting or getting bigger.

File: no.png (115KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 600x600px

ITT dipshits that don't understand archimedes' principle. lemme spell it out for you:

an object displaces it's weight when placed in a liquid. volume is only relevant if you're trying to balance the buoyant forces to make something float (as is done with ships or submarines).

>>713842426
as people have pointed out, you are wrong. Ice has a different density than water, making it occupy more space.

if the experiment is done with enough ice or a good sense of detail, it'll prove the water level lowers

While ice slightly decreases in volume when it melts, that is negligible in this situation. Ice cubes tend to be mostly submerged, but there usually is a small part of it floating above the water level. Assuming this is the situation, the water level will rise very slightly, maybe unnoticeably so.

>>713842012
Actually, heating water from 0 degrees to 4 degrees makes it contract.

>>713841567
Water expands when it freezes = CORRECT
Other liquids contract when freezing = CORRECT
Physical volume of H2O changes when frozen
Physical mass DOES NOT CHANGE
Frozen H2O is SAME MASS as liquid water
Frozen H2O has gas trapped in it
Gas INCREASES buoyancy
Ice now floats because of BUOYANCY

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT!!!

Take some water and put it in a pressure vessel
Crank up the pressure to 100 times normal atmosphere
Freeze the pressurized water
More water in that volume because the atmospheric pressure
Pop that pressure cube in a glass of water in a low pressure environment
IT WILL SINK!
Because, wait for it, the mass of the volume of the pressurized ice is greater than the mass of equivalent volume of water it's displacing in a lower pressure environment.

Are you starting to learn now?

>>713842606
No, it doesn't. The expansion is caused by the water turning to ice (which is less densely structured), not because of water expanding inherently when cooled.

>>713842662
>an object displaces it's weight when placed in a liquid
This is trivially disprovable. If I drop a neutron star in the Pacific Ocean, all the water in the ocean doesn't leap out to "get displaced".

>>713842698
Yeah, but you probably aren't heating it to specifically 4 degrees, just room temperature most likely. In which case you would see expansion. But I do agree that it depends on the room temperature. Thanks that's actually a better answer.

>>713842558
nah, water displacement is volume object x density of fluid x acceleration

File: main-qimg-166d0774f99e939764dabe03b02874d1-c[1].jpg (39KB, 572x350px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 572x350px

>>713842814
>not because of water expanding inherently when cooled.
Wrooooooooong!

>>713839596

anytime ice melts - even ice in the middle of a continent - the sea level rises

science always wins guys

>>713842856
if you dropped a neutron star into the ocean, it'd fucking attract everything around it because of it's gravity. stop bringing up shit that has nothing to do with the question at hand.

drop a 1 gram ball into 100 grams of water (which is nearly 100 mL iirc), it will displace 1 gram of water. drop in 1 gram of ice, it will displace 1 gram of water.

>>713839596
ice will take up more room so the water level lowers after the ice melts, derp derp derp.

>>713841614
This isn't a question of volume or density, but of mass.

Buoyancy and mass are proportional to volume and displacement when it comes to floating things in a liquid.

That's why metal boats float.

>>713842614
yeah but the ICE+water still takes up more volume than the water+water

the question is not about buoyancy, its about total volume, right?

>>713839596
rise, obviously...

>>713841985
How does the water level rise of fall without any water being added or removed?

>>713839596

ice is heavier than water so it will technically make the water level rise when it melts because the heavy ice will not be pushing down on it

i have observed this in action but with container ships which go over a tunnel down in norfolk, va

the container ships are super heavy, and therefore push the water down

but when the container ship goes by, you can see the water rise up behind it

ice floating in the ocean does the same thing, except for very small pieces of ice like the kind that comes out of your freezer because that is not very heavy at all and the ocean is very heavy

>>713843043
So if I drop 100 grams of depleted uranium into 100 grams of water, it will displace 100 grams of water?

No it won't.

>>713842949
That is wrong, sorry. Look up the story of Archimedes and the golden crown (it's where the phrase eureka comes from). It's probably more complex than than just mass, I'll give you that... but your formula doesn't factor in mass or weight, which obviously plays a major role.

I mean buoyancy by the way, not water displacement, I phrased it wrong.

>>713842662
volume is the entire question isnt it?

what takes up more space, Ice+water or ice+ice?

File: 1473809880525.jpg (72KB, 346x530px)

72KB, 346x530px

>>713842806
You do know why that would cause it to sink? By increasing pressure will squeeze out air pockets in the ice, similar to when you freeze boiled water. Its forms truly clear (no air) instead of hazy (air pockets). If you ever tried the experiment of freezing boiled filtered water will become neutrally buoyant and float fully submerged below the water surface. So this logic you have is due to correlation, but, correlation is not the same a causation.

>>713842969
I think you're reading that wrong, the density drops with increasing temperature once 4 degrees centigrade has been reached. Meaning it's volume increases by the same measure.

File: crusts-1539[1].jpg (411KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 960x640px

>>713843251
No, because the "water level" is the level of the water, not the total volume of the whole system.

You don't measure from the base to the top of the ice cube, you measure from the base to the top of the water.

>>713843347
yes, it will. place 100 grams of water in a container large enough to measure the difference. otherwise the water will just spill out and you'll be left with the difference (assuming you're able to extract exactly 100 grams of uranium out of it).

are you just pretending to be stupid?

>>713843490
>similar to when you freeze boiled water.
Trivially wrong.

Frozen boiled water floats on water, and therefore is less dense than water.

>>713839657
Underated post.
So many 2k faggots ITT!
Ty for the smile anon

>>713843043
> trying this hard to troll

>>713839596
No, it won't.

When you add the ice cube, the water level rises as water is displaced. The volume of the water displaced multiplied by its density gives the mass of the water displaced. Archimedes' Principle tells us that this is equal to the mass of the ice cube. As a result, when the ice cube melts it simply becomes more dense and disappears into the water.

Interesting to think about.

>>713839637
the molecular structure of ice is less dence than water... the answer is it will stay the same. dont be a dumbshit. learn some science fucker

>>713843346
>ice is heavier than water
ON WHAT FUCKING PLANET?
hurr-durr, it's the same matter frozen or liquid
where does the new weight come from?
does molten steel weigh more than cold steel?
try weighing a frozen steak, then thaw it, weigh it again, cook said steak, enjoy last meal, then, please, kill yourself.

>>713843553
That's a good thing to point out, as its probably the reason some people think different things here.

The 'overall water level' from the start could be interpreted as including the volume of the ice, or it could not.

I guess its one of the reasons these sort of questions somehow seem to generate so many different outcomes.

>>713843402
volume isn't the question, it's a question of the total mass of the system. mass doesn't change. but to answer your question, ice + ice will take up more "space" because ice is less dense than water, which means an overall larger volume.

>>713843606

You have it the wrong way around. You are confusing weight with volume. Water has a density of 1 which means that 100 g equals 100 ml, so weight is "equal" to volume, but that is not the case with other materials.

File: 1471293495462.gif (958KB, 631x339px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 631x339px

>>713843628
Obviously you have never tried the experiment. Because if you boil out all impurities the ice will become neutral in buoyancy. This is an experiment I've done when i was in grade school and have repetitive results. Either you are willfully ignorant or you never actually have tried experiments for yourself.

>>713843751

you obviously don't understand science

any item that you forge into a solider mass than it was before weighs more than it did before

want proof?

pour a cup of water on your foot

now freeze a cup of water, drop the huge ice cube on your foot

which hurt more?

the ice, because it weighs more, you idiot

i stand by my original statement, science is never wrong

>>713843346
this is the most inaccurate description of water displacement i've ever read. bravo.

>>713840330
>need to be a certified scientist to melt an ice cube in a cup of water

File: 5-pc-Water-Drop-Shape-20g-50g-font-b-Weight-b-font-Lead-font-b-Fishing[1].jpg (163KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1000x1000px

>>713843606
So you're saying that if I put three of these

>>713843889

it is not inaccurate at all, i have observed it on many occassions to visit my sick aunt who lives in virginia beach, we go past those container ships a lot and the water ALWAYS rises behind them

because heavy = pressure

and no more heavy = pressure released = water rises

it's observable, repeatable, and proveable

File: 100ml-graduated-cylinder-55304[1].jpg (18KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 640x480px

>>713843966
Into this, all the water will just leap out because the entire volume of the cylinder has been "displaced"?

>>713843824
i never said other materials have the same volume. i said if you had a container large enough to contain both 100g of uranium and water, the uranium would displace 100g of water. whatever water that gets spilled out if the container wasn't large enough would be a result of the container being unable to hold the total 200 grams of combined material.

>>713843886
Seriously? Ice would weigh less than the same volume of water. It contains more air which by density standards would make it less dense. Just because something is more rigid or more viscous and causes more energy transfer than a non rigid thing is ridiculous and childish.

>>713844083

water cannot leap, it does not have legs

you are a retard

>>713843490
Yes, the air trapped in ice adds buoyancy, but remove that gas and pressurize the water, say like the highly pressurized water at the bottom of the ocean, pop that pressurized cube in a glass of water at sea level (or 1 atmosphere) and that higher density cube will sink because it has a greater density/mass than the low pressure water.

File: 45647.jpg (17KB, 200x300px)

17KB, 200x300px

>>713843886
> science is never wrong
>evolution
>big bang
>dinosaurs
> science is never wrong

>>713844137

ok so now you are ADDING AIR which by definition adds WEIGHT and yet you are claiming it would weigh less?

seriously anon, go do the experiment

come back and tell me which hurt your foot more - a cup of water poured on it or a cup-sized block of ice dropped on it

if the water caused more pain then fine, water is heavier than ice

but when you get back from the hospital because the ice broke your idiot foot, let me know and I'll give you an "i told you so"

>>713843808
>mass doesn't change. but to answer your question, ice + ice will take up more "space" because ice is less dense than water, which means an overall larger volume.

indeed. but the final quation is in terms of the 'water level' -- is this mass, volume or what is it?

And do you count the mass/volume of the ice cube from the start or do you not, considering it 'floats'?

I think these questions may be a large factor in why there are so many different answers here

>>713843740
and the molecular structure of melting ice contains the non-dense alignment, causing additional expantion. Also its not an entire cube, thats submerged, so learn science, u fuck

>>713839732
you are correct sir

>>713844292
did u make any point here, pope?

Fall

>>713839596
Stays the same

Ice is less dense than water, thus takes up more space. So it floats, and protrudes slightly above the water level. As it melts, it just fills into the space where the ice cube used to be, except for the bit that protrudes above the surface, because that is the exact difference of volume.

If the point is to be political... This does not apply to global warming because the polar ice caps are sitting on a solid ground, not floating freely. That WOULD affect the sea level. The earth isn't a glass of water with an ice cube in it.

File: pope.jpg (14KB, 300x450px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x450px

>>713844400
Only god can melt ice.

>>713844083
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110645/why-does-ice-melting-not-change-the-water-level-in-a-container

>>713839596
rise.

>>713843346
It will not rise. The weight of the water displaced by the ice is exactly the weight of the ice. That's why anything floats. It's called:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes%27_principle

Considering how water is denser than ice, it'll fall. Come on guys.

>>713844171
You removethe air, which then removes the lifting force. Ice is a solid structure with neutral density is going to be 1. With air the neutral density becomes less than 1 and that causes it rise to tye surface, but as soon as it melts the air escapes lowering its density at the same rste as its volume lowers. So literally negates anything it could possibly add. Because you NEED water to get ice, there cannot be more water on the planet than we started with. Unless the planet magically passes through some thing in soace that causes water to collect more in earths surface, which wouldn't make sense due to our atmosphere.

>>713844559
so how come only ice can make god?

>>713843399
I looked it up and even now that im pretty drunk, I see that you have the right way of thinking

>>713844159
Well it's going to have to find some way to do it, because that entire cylinder holds less than 150g.

>>713844133

I have no idea what you are trying to say. Uranium has a density of ~19 g/cm3. That means that 100 g of uranium would have a volume of 5,26 cm3. 100 g of water has a volume of 100 cm3. So "a container large enough to contain both 100 g of uranium and water" would have to be 105,26 cm3. So far, so good. Now what point are you trying to prove, considering this data?

>>713839909
Wow! This guy knows what he's talking about.

>>713843886
>any item that you forge into a solider mass than it was before weighs more than it did before

So, where does the extra mass come from? Magic Molecule Pixies?

Mass doesn't change with temperature.

Want proof?

Take a pop bottle, fill it with warm water to the top of the label and put on the cap.
>Weigh it.
Chill that bottle in the fridge for a couple hours.
>Weigh it.
Freeze that bottle for several hours.
>Weigh it.

HOLY SHIT!!! Same weight at every state.

>>713844294
Weight is not equal to density. You can have a 6000lbs tree but it'll float sonce its less dense than water, untill it absorbs water into the air pockets in the wood it will be less dense than water until it becomes neutral in density. This is why you can find trees floating under the waters surface. Come on are you serious?

>>713844701

There is no way to conclude that that container (or any container) "holds less than 150g". Grams is a measurement of weight, not volume. You can conclude that the container holds less than 150 ml or cm3, because those are measurements of volume.

Let's say the container in the picture holds 150 cm3. That means that it will hold 150 g of water, because water has a density of 1. Uranium has a density of 19, which means that the container at 150 cm3 will hold 2850 g of uranium.

File: cube.jpg (3KB, 116x125px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 116x125px

>>713839672
>>713839679
>>713839596

These^^^ displacement already occurred and will remain the same

>>713839657

what nigga?

>>713844677
Yes, the trapped air adds buoyancy, and the cube (minus the gases) will have the same mass/buoyancy as liquid water (minus the gases) at the same atmospheric pressure.

But water can be pressurized (more mass in less space). That pressure cube will float ONLY if placed within liquid water that is under the same pressure as the that present when the ice cube was formed. The frozen pressure cube will sink in lower pressure liquid water.

>>713839596
I asked jesus.

He said youre a cunt.

>>713844633
yeah but the apparent answer is that volume has nothing to do in the change in water level.

In solid form, only the mass of ice counts towards the water level.

In liquid form, the voluma of water counts towards water level

Stay same

>>713845313
yeah, that's why we're worried about our polar ice caps melting and causing the sea level to remain as it is.

>>713845594
It will only become neutral, it will not sink to the bottom. Pressure only effects the absorption of air into its structure. So high pressure would remove the air. That doesn't raise its density. Also of you took that same pressure cube and weighed it next to the same exact sized cube of ice that wasn't pressurized would actually weigh more than the non pressurized one. Its due to it containing more of the higher density molecule (water) instead if the less dense of the two (air).

Does that not make sense? Because what you are trying to tell me is those two cubes should weigh the same. Which is wrong.

>>713844494
Sea levels would also rise because of thermal expansion and dilution of seawater.

>>713846036
Ice caps are not floating in water they are resting on land you fucking idiot

>>713839596

If my penis were floating between your mothers tonsils....

...Will I ever call her again?

>>713839596
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA8DdkM2Wqo

>>713846158
Are you serious? The majority of ice is found under the surface of our oceans. Only a small fraction of that is freshwater as glaciers on land.

File: Dis' bitch.png (52KB, 302x169px)

52KB, 302x169px

>>713846133
Nigga what?

File: cube.png (26KB, 116x125px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 116x125px

>>713846036
>>713846158
yes what he said^ we are worried because they are not even touching water yet

File: 1468901205499.jpg (12KB, 225x225px)

12KB, 225x225px

>>713846950

File: Brine Pool Example.gif (2MB, 400x265px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x265px

>>713846093
>two cubes should weigh the same.

No, the high pressure water or cube will weigh more than the low pressure water or cube. If the pressure of the cube and water are equal, which means equal mass in equal volume, the ice floats. If mass of the cube is increased by the pressure, it will sink in low pressure water because it's mass per unit of volume is greater than the mass per volume of low pressure water.

Buoyancy is an effect of mass displacing volume. The question posits that there is a stable pressure for both the liquid and solid mass of H2O.

Look up 'Brine Pool'. These are basins of highly salted water on the ocean floor. Because the density/mass is greater, this brine water sinks. The same will happen with a pressurized ice cube in lower pressure water.

>>713839596
It will stay the same. It's called displacement. Did you attend 5th grade science class nigger?

>>713839763
You had the same amount of water to begin with.

>>713846133
Thermal expansion would be minimal, and dilution would only occur if more water was added. Glacial run off is the problem. Melt the land locked ice, it flows to the sea, sea levels rise.

>>713839596
i would do a 360 and walk away

Fill up empty plastic bottle with water put in freezer, wait overnight, open freezer next day see what happened

>>713847609
The water expands, but the mass of the water stays the same.

Pls leave your basements and take a chemistry course. Being solid instead of liquid water is a phase change, so would becoming a gas. In both cases the water level is lowered. Reversing this would raise the water level as liquids fill their containers. You still have the same amount of h2O .

>>713847153
Are you trying to say that water that is holding into a more dense molecular structure (salt) would make it more dense and weigh more?? No shit.
Seriously if you took a high pressure cube and a low pressure cube of the same exact size, they would have completely different densities and weights. They would also look completely different than one another, the higher pressure cube would appear more transparent due to less diffusion of light, from the air pockets in the low pressure one and uniformity of its structure being closer together this makes it way more dense and "hard". But these only count under pressure Chambers or vaccumes. In reality ice freezes froming air pockets and that causes it to have to stretch out its structure making it less dense and more brittle but way more compression resistant. Similarly to ceramic structures.

>>713839923
Then why does ice float you fucking retard?

File: 1479687639925.jpg (107KB, 1092x597px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1092x597px

neither. global warming is a hoax.

>>713848188
Its not a hoax. Why are people so retarded about one side or the other. Its a natrual phenomenon of earth that has been reoccurring since the dawn of time.

Earth's North Pole is covered by floating pack ice (sea ice) over the Arctic Ocean. Portions of the ice that do not melt seasonally can get very thick, up to 3–4 meters thick over large areas, with ridges up to 20 meters thick. One-year ice is usually about 1 meter thick.

>>713839596
It will fall. Ice is less dense than water. So as the ice melts it actually condenses into a smaller space.

>>713847918
Remove any dissolved gases from the water you're freezing, producing nothing but polar liquid water. When that polar liquid water freezes, the electron bonds of the two oxygen atoms align, forming a molecular ice lattice. If that pure/degassed water is pressurized (not with high pressure gas but physically (with a physical force like a piston or ram)) then that high density water has a higher mass per unit volume than the same pure/degassed water. Both cubes would be transparent, but the high pressure cube would weigh more per unit volume because of the increased mass per unit volume.

File: old lady.webm (1MB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x400px

>>713847064
>>713846950
>>713839596

huh? i dont give a fuck about global warming juest enjoy science. I should not have used the word "we", but what is the Jews stance on global warming???

>>713846881
>>713847331
You guys clearly don't know what you're talking about. On global scales thermal expansion would have a tangible effect on sea levels and you are adding freshwater to the saltwater in the ocean by melting the polar ice caps.

If you dont count the ice as water, and measured the level of water around the ice, then the water level will rise

>>713844292
Heh, that's exactly the point a more religious friend always brings up. A good one unfortunately

>>713847178
You can't drink a solid...

>>713849112
To measure any real thermal expansion, you'd have to raise the temps so high that it would kill everything in the oceans. The ice caps that are submerged are already displacing their equivalent volume of liquid water. It's the land ice above sea level that's a problem. Melting floating icebergs are displacing their equivalent volume already, so no change from them.

Neither

>>713848897
Yeah,they would both appear more transparent than natrual ice. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't be the same, if you place pure water under compression to remove any air then to freeze it would result in that ice being exactly 1 on the scale of density. You cannot raise density of water therfore you can only make it become neutral in density/buoyancy. All you have done is prevent the structure of the ice to form around pockets of less dense materials which would cause it to remain the exact same as liquid water in the means of density. But that also means that if you place that cube in a glas of normal water (non salt) it'll still remain neutral even in a vaccume or under pressure the cube will still remain neutral since you cannot change the structure of the water and its unable to be compressed it will resist anything you do to it in that aspect. But as soon as you allow the water to form around another molecule like air it can effect the density of the structure the water has formed not the water its self. When you add salt all water does is grab onto the salt molecules and holds on for dear life. Doesn't mean salt and water are now one molecule. It really means the water is using the density of the salt to change its own.

>>713839596
It stays the same. The density of the ice cube has made up for the water that will replace the cube.

>>713839596
Stay the same, because the water expands and the amount of expansion is the same amount that rises out of the water.

>>713849112
Thermal expansion only works with things other than water. Water expands when frozen under normal circumstances. It also contracts or recedes when its heated.

>>713839657
kek