Timeline for answer to Can guns be rendered unusable by changing the atmosphere? by Piro
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2016 at 11:20 | comment | added | Piro | Well it is up to OP to present it in a way to make any sense. I am not a chemist to reason about it deeper. I just think that since radiation has no problem to go through explosive material and shell casings it is more plausible than other solutions since explosives work independently from atmosphere. But your points are valid | |
| Nov 25, 2016 at 10:46 | comment | added | David Richerby | And how is this mechanism going to deal with the explosives that don't look like nitrated sugars, such as nitroglycerine (essentially nitrated alcohol), TNT (nitrated paint thinner), RDX (which doesn't fit in to the pattern of "essentially something you're familiar with, plus nitro groups"), gunpowder (essentially coal plus an oxidizer), ... | |
| Nov 25, 2016 at 10:39 | comment | added | David Richerby | I don't understand how your response relates to my comment. Your body and explosions both work in essentially the same way: they involve chemical reactions that need a small amount of energy to trigger them and, once that's happened, the reaction releases more energy than you just put in. How do you propose to make the chemical reactions of guncotton (chemically, essentially sugar plus nitro groups) much more sensitive without also making the chemical reactions in my body (essentially, sugar minus nitro groups) not also go haywire? | |
| Nov 25, 2016 at 10:31 | comment | added | Piro | True, but we are bombarded daily by many types of particles, some of them stop immediatelly while some go through earth without notice, all of them have some kind of impact already, so there is possibility to find one. | |
| Nov 21, 2016 at 9:12 | comment | added | David Richerby | It's hard to imagine how this radiation would make explosions more sensitive without also making, e.g., the sugar molecules within your body much more willing to decompose. | |
| Nov 18, 2016 at 13:41 | history | edited | Piro | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 240 characters in body
|
| Nov 18, 2016 at 6:34 | review | First posts | |||
| Nov 18, 2016 at 6:39 | |||||
| Nov 18, 2016 at 6:29 | history | answered | Piro | CC BY-SA 3.0 |