Talk:Gunpowder/Archive 11

Article was a disaster area, now a post-nuclear holocaust God-forsaken no-man's land

Both articles are currently disgraceful, but I don't have the time or energy to fix them right now. Instead, I would like to invite anyone out around Santa Cruz, CA with nothing better to do tomorrow to celebrate the Fourth of July with me by testing out some Chinese gunpowder recipes. Bring a copy of Needham and we'll see how much punch the WCTY explosives really pack. I need at least one other person to share the blame with if we set the woods on fire. I also have some bamboo stalks, if we want to try out Needham's original Chinese "crackers." It should scare away the demons, or at least the neighbors. (ocanter) 75.52.243.252 05:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

For all our disagreements, Ocanter, we actually do want your input. Happy 4th and try not to blow anything off you might need later. JFD 05:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Damn, that was a bad-ass 4th of July, this one stupid kid I was hanging out with shot a mini bottle rocket out of his mouth. Idiot. I'm surprised his face didn't get burned. Anyways, so what is this huge disastrous thing that I missed happening to the article now? There have barely been any edits to the article since it was a "disaster area" into a "post-nuclear holocaust God-forsaken no-man's land". Hah. By the way, that last one sounds like the title for an 80s thrash metal song.--PericlesofAthens 18:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, JFD and Pericles, and sorry I didn't have a chance to check back earlier. The bamboo crackers were fun. The majority of the nodes were duds, but a few of them made an impressive bang. It was a less loud but deeper sound than a gunpowder firecracker, more like a small pistol. I didn't mess around with any saltpetre. My chemist friend reminded me, I think wisely, that it is fire season in the valley, and probably not the best time to start blowing stuff up, despite the holiday. It's got me thinking about the experiments Needham documented himself, though. I hope to look at those in a little more detail when I have more time. Peace, (ocanter) Ocanter 18:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't have the time or energy to fix them right now. Fix what again?--PericlesofAthens 18:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Just all the same problems I've been complaining about for the last few months, except that now they exist in three articles instead of one (black powder, gunpowder, and history of gunpowder). The main problem is the blatant contradiction, which still exists, between the definition of gunpowder and the historical claims about its invention, and the complete vacuum of data on the most rapid period of worldwide development (c.1200). Other than that, I guess it's okey-dokey. Peace, and happy 4th. It's a weird way to celebrate our independence, eh? Ocanter 18:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I can only reiterate that we must adhere to what sources say, and that the article must reflect the consensus of reliable sources. If you can cite a reliable source which points to a contradiction between the definition of gunpowder and the historical claims about its invention, then by all means do so.

If the article doesn't have much data on the period c. 1200, that's because the historical record doesn't either. (For the time being barring any new discoveries of course.) The worldwide development of gunpowder c. 1200 and who introduced gunpowder to Europe etc etc is a matter of much discussion.

There are plenty of primary sources, especially Muslim sources, that merit further discussion here. More generally, Muslim and Christian alchemical sources show a long period of development of incendiary weapons, of which black powder appears at the last stage. Woops, sorry, "was introduced at the last stage." Ocanter 20:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

No one is arguing that incendiary weapons were invented in 9th century China, just gunpowder. If there is a plausible case for gunpowder as the culmination of Christian or Muslim alchemical development of incendiary weapons, then surely some peer-reviewed journal somewhere has published an article arguing exactly that. JFD 20:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The black powder article doesn't exist anymore, and its contents have been moved either here or to history of gunpowder.

As for the weirdness of fireworks, they're how much of the world celebrate their national days, no? Not to mention the New Year (Gregorian, Lunar, or otherwise). JFD 19:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but we're not just "much of the world." If we were, I wouldn't see much point in celebrating our independence at all. Of course it couldn't have happened without the war, but I would prefer to celebrate the principles Jefferson espoused in the Declaration of Independence, and to consider whether those principles, or any principles, are ever worth war, rather than simply to celebrate the power of the weapons. Now you must excuse me, as I have a lot of work to do in the coming weeks. I'll try to get back to the article when I have time. Peace, Ocanter 20:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

If they're meant to symbolize the power of weapons on the Fourth of July or Bastille Day, then what are they meant to symbolize at New Year? Sometimes, Ocanter, fireworks are just fireworks. JFD 20:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

detonation

I have it from an unpublished but very reliable source that black gunpowder does detonate when subjected to sudden pressure, such as when shot with a high powered rifle. This is apparently one of its many disadvantages, compared to smokeless powder. Unsigned comment added by User:David_R._Ingham

Well you are now talking Low Vulnerability Ammunition and smokeless powder is not exactly Low Vulnerability Ammunition. So I'm not convinced there is much difference between the two; although admittedly I have no information on black gunpowder. Pyrotec 09:13, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

2nd century

Could someone verify if The Kinship of the Three does in fact contain a gunpowder recipe? --JFD 13:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

There are plenty of references and books printed to show it has a recipe including Needham himself. Whether it has the word "guns", "explosives", "warfare". I doubt it. Should it be mentioned as an indirect source. Absolutely. Benjwong 14:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Here's a quote I got from Needham:

Without doubt it was in the previous century, around +850, that the early alchemical experiments on the constituents of gunpowder, with its self-contained oxygen, reached their climax in the appearance of the mixture itself. (Needham 1986:7)

JFD 15:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok there were always doubts as to how the alchemy book fits in. This quote is alot more certain and direct. I'll certainly take it as is. Benjwong 19:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Mixing Ratios?

The article says, "75% potassium nitrate, 15% softwood charcoal and 10% sulfur," but no indication as to whether this is by mass or by volume. Anybody who knows enough to add that information to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Briantw (talk • contribs) 12:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Its by mass.Pyrotec (talk) 13:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

No wonder mine doesn't burn well :-) "One man can make a difference." (talk) 02:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Human consumption

The article briefly mentions Chinese medicine, but can you say something about the use of gunpowder for human consumption. I have heard of Napoleonic soldiers in the Russian Campaign eating their horses on their breastplates seasoned with gunpowder. And apparently panther milk is brandy + gin + gunpowder. --Error (talk) 23:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Not all medicine is designed to be eaten. The first of these "sayings" appears in Wikipedia, and is given without quoting any citations; and the second does not appear in wikipedia.Pyrotec (talk) 11:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You appear to be the source of this information - you added it to Battle of Eylau this morning.Pyrotec (talk) 11:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The reference to Russian Campaign eating their horses can also be traced back to a move made by Error on 9 August 2005 from the article Food as Taboo - I can't trace it back any further.Pyrotec (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

That explains why I had some vague ideas. :) Could somebody find some references? I probably read it in Marvin Harris's Good To Eat. Anyway I found some bits:

From the last days of October until mid-December, at which time the army arrived at Wilna, horse meat was the only food of the soldiers; many could not obtain even this, and they died from starvation before the intense cold weather set in. The meat which the soldiers ate was either that of exhausted and sick horses which had not been able to walk any further, or of such as had been lying dead on the road for some time. With the greatest greed and a beastly rage the men threw themselves on the dead animals; they fought without distinction of rank and with a disregard of all military discipline--officers and privates alike--for the possession of the best liked parts of the dead animal--the brain, the heart, and the liver. The weakest had to be contented with any part. Many devoured the meat raw, others pierced it with the bayonet, roasted it at the camp fire and ate it without anything else, often with great relish.

--Error (talk) 01:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Bingo. It mentions Larrey, horse meat and gunpowder but no breastplates. It has a reference for a work by Larrey. Can somebody research it to make proper references? --Error (talk) 01:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Great. The reference is: "Parker, Harold T. (1983) Three Napoleonic Battles. (2nd Ed). Duke University Press. ISBN 0-82230547-X. Page 83." According to my dictionary Bouillon is a thin soup made by boiling, e.g. meat, fish, (horse meat in this case). I suspect that the potassium nitrate would go into solution into the soup and the charcoal and sulfur would float on the top - and might get lost. The potassium nitrate is not too dissimilar to some of the additives that go into things like bacon and sausages. Its true from the reference that gunpowder was used as a seasoning; however I don't think that gunpowder should be promoted as something that is fit for human consumption - it clearly is not intended for that purpose, they used it after the battle to avoid starvation.Pyrotec (talk) 16:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The "panther milk" talk I heard was in a military context, so I think that perhaps it is consumed as a bravado. Besides military personnel has easier access to gunpowder. --Error (talk) 20:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)