Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn) Newsgroups: net.sci Subject: Re: Question about Electricity Message-ID: <2995@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Thu, 7-Nov-85 19:56:05 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.2995 Posted: Thu Nov 7 19:56:05 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Nov-85 05:24:22 EST References: <621@hlwpc.UUCP> <662@petrus.UUCP> <714@alberta.UUCP> <2358@ukma.UUCP> <1843@watdcsu.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 8 In all this talk about whether water is a "conductor" or not, people sound like they think this is an all-or-nothing proposition. Pure water has fairly high (but not infinite) resistivity, but it doesn't take much in the way of ionic impurities to reduce its resistivity substantially. Since a swimming pool (postulated in the original problem) would have hypochlorite salts dissolved in it, it would conduct electricity much better than pure water.