On bad science and my brain

[xiphias]

So, wcg has been doing daily science trivia questions, which are a lot of fun. And I've gotten NONE of them right.

Now, he's finally asked a question I actually DO know the answer to. Because it's about WRONG science:

. . . [D]uring the 17th century, a new theory of combustion developed. This theory identified a new element, though some thought it might be a special kind of earth, which was contained within all things that could be burned. After burning, the ash was considered to represent the purified substance, after all of this burnable element had been released.

Today's question: What was the name of this theoretical substance?

I knew that one. Because it doesn't actually involve science.

If you know the answer, answer it in Bill's journal, here, rather than in my journal. I'm not doing the trivia quizzes after all -- Bill is.

But it's sad to realize that I know how that substance works, aether works, the four humors work. . . .

Comments

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Oh, that's right! It has a measurable negative weight!

That leads to all sorts of nifty concepts, doesn't it? You could create much more powerful zepplins with this stuff in gaseous form, which would be a much, much greater explosion risk than hydrogen.

It should be possible to work out the substance's specific gravity and its energy density -- so you could work out what weapons based on it would do.

See, THIS is why people like steampunk.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

Steampunk heck! Not unless it's some variant of 17th century steampunk. That would be fun in its own twisted way, but it wouldn't be anything like the 19th century steampunk stuff.

Oh, and thanks for passing the word about my little daily questions.