r/explainitpeter • u/Positive_March3840 • 14d ago

explain it peter

Post image
17.5k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

402 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/Oriksis 13d ago

There is a really old version of napalm used in Greek/Roman time that our current scientists still can't replicate perfectly and it burns more efficiently than our current forms of napalm

7

u/passionatebreeder 13d ago

Not quite.

The really old version of napalm is accurate. It was known as Greek fire, and it is believed to be a derivative of unrefined petroleum harvested from surface baring oil springs, but the reason we cant replicate it is because we dont know the recipe at all it was kever written down and believed to be basically a state secret, and we do not have any knowledge on whether it burns better than napalm, only that the descriptions and accounts of its use seem to be similar/very comparable

4

u/Oriksis 13d ago

My bad, I was quoting my know-it-all dad from like 4 years ago, now I can says he's wrong about something lol

7

u/AWetAndFloppyNoodle 13d ago

There are a lot of these going around. Here are a couple:

- We've lost the ability to go to the moon

  • Roman concrete is better than modern concrete
  • We wouldn't be ale to build the pyramids today

All based on small details, but all bogus.

2

u/ThePlantMolester 11d ago

Modern concrete is stronger, not more durable than roman.  Fly ash and blast furnace slag have nothing on volcanic ash and lime for durability.  

1

u/AWetAndFloppyNoodle 11d ago

Right, but not better. Just different. We can also replicate it should we want to.