This question was considered a duplicate because of a previous question titled "Height of Water 'Splashing'". However, the previous question only considers the height of the splash, whereas answers to the later question may consider a lot of different effects on the body of water, such as height of the produced waves at a large distance from the point of impact, sounds generated in water, and so on.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
-
4$\begingroup$ The one who posted it apparently thinks so, at least. The "marked as duplicate by Community ♦" indicates that the OP agrees with the closure. $\endgroup$ – Chris♦ May 18 '19 at 5:08
-
$\begingroup$ @Chris : Does that mean the question cannot be reopened? I just offered an argument against closing the question as a duplicate. Some people may reject the argument and some may accept it. $\endgroup$ – akhmeteli May 18 '19 at 5:18
-
$\begingroup$ No, the post can still be reopened like any other. $\endgroup$ – Chris♦ May 18 '19 at 5:23
-
1$\begingroup$ @Chris : OK, I have voted to reopen. $\endgroup$ – akhmeteli May 18 '19 at 5:37
-
1$\begingroup$ Seems too broad to me. $\endgroup$ – JMac May 21 '19 at 16:11
-
$\begingroup$ @JMac : But not a duplicate:-)? $\endgroup$ – akhmeteli May 22 '19 at 0:37
-
$\begingroup$ No, I wouldn't call it a duplicate because it somewhat skirts that with broadness. I'm not going to reopen though because I would just want to close it for a different reason. $\endgroup$ – JMac May 22 '19 at 1:12
