Wet and dry

Thanks to Gregg Clarke for a good laugh yesterday. He gave me a wonderful story. A scientist once explained to him the wonders of science; how we could explain everything about the H²O molecule, how we knew the exact weight and forces involved to make and destroy water and how exactly none of that could explain that it is was wet.

We are good at measuring the measurables. Then again, do the measurables count? Professor Robert Winston illustrates a similar point in his documentary on the human body. Standing on the deck of a ship, he describes that human tears have the same chemical consistency as the water at a certain point in the Thames. We know that the average human sheds 40 litres of tears in a lifetime. Without knowing if those tears are shed in joy, or distress we know nothing, Except perhaps that tears have the same consistency as river water at a certain point of mixing with sea water....
So are tears and river water interoperable? You would think so looking at the way we deal with market research data. Does one person watching "Desperate housewives" equal another?
Can the one watching it in anger, as she recognizes the struggles she faces compare to the other, watching it in disinterested absence? "My friends are not like that..."

The key thing really is, how does it move them? Emotionally, physically? I suppose it brings us back to resonance and the transfer of emotional energy. The difference between wet and dry will be in how much energy there is to make the atoms dance.