Talk:Gunpowder

worth a look
worth a look https://books.google.co.in/books?id=I5joCwAAQBAJ&lpg=PT91&ots=3hbWRBRhYa&pg=PT27#v=onepage&q&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.243.9.179 (talk) 05:49, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

India - The real inventor of Gunpowder
Gunpowder was invented in ancient India and subsequently reached china via sichuan and later spread throughout most parts of Eurasia by the end of the 13th century. . After British conquest of bengal in india, The british maintained gunpowder monopoly and was key force behind the rise of british empire worldwide.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.227.222.7 (talk • contribs)


 * The sources you're citing make this out to be a conjecture, based on Indian manuscripts that have not been accurately dated. - MrOllie (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * India was the largest producer and exporter of gunpowder in those times. Also how can central asian desert nomads establish gunpowder production at grand scale in india but cant do so in europe as we know for sure mongol empire reached upto the borders of vienna. The fact is gunpowder was simply invented in ancient india much before it reached china. It was invented by purbyias of bhojpur, bihar. Please read the above books entirely and thoroughly as requested earlier before making a judgement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.227.222.7 (talk) 17:18, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Gunpowder was invented in China during the late Tang dynasty (9th century). The earliest use of gunpowder in India may have been as early as the mid-13th century, possibly during the Mongol invasions of India in the 13th and 14th centuries. Most historians agree that gunpowder's origins were in China due to the amount of archaeological evidence and historical documents that exist predating others by centuries. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:35, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * These fanboys of True [fraud] Indology  aka BharadwaajSpeaks must realise that history is not written based on obscure mentions here and there. The amount of physical evidence available for widespread use of gunpowder in China is no match for your stupid claims.  ChandlerMinh (talk) 20:15, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Other Uses
Is the use by 'Captain Shrapnel' supposed to refer to the inventor of shrapnel? Rather suspicious because he died about 11 years before the date stated (according to the article about him). If you ask me it looks a bit fishy. 115.69.35.19 (talk) 01:27, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

General heresay
A couple of random notes about this article. 1. Chemical reaction. Claiming there is "a" chemical reaction is ludicrous! Potassium Nitrate is an oxidizer. It can oxidize either carbon or sulfur under the right conditions. This article notes that in one study the *actual* products were carbonate, sulfate, sulfide, and thiocyanate as well as ammonium carbonate. The not-chemically-clueless would note that sulfate results from the oxidation of sulfur, while the sulfide results from sulfur's reduction - opposing reactions (they would also note that thiocynate is an intermediate in the oxidation of C to CO2, S to SO2 and N to N2. By all this I mean that there *is* no single chemcial "reaction" - there's a great many, probably hundreds, if not thousands. 2. Writing about the "balanced" reaction, without specifying the starting ratios, is misleading - it gives the reader an unjustified and incorrect precision that just doesn't exist in reality. 3. Charcoal is *crude* carbon, at best. The composition of "fresh" charcoal varies between ~50% carbon to 95%, typically there is about 3% ash (inorganic carbonates, oxides, silicates) and between 0.5% to 40%(!) "tar" (where tar is a complex and variable mixture of condensed hydrocarbons (with both N and O present)). Charcoal rapidly absorbs moisture to 5% - 10% upon sitting.4. Methane and water. While I've no doubt methane, water, carbon monoxide and various NOx compounds are produced, it isn't obvious to me that *any* of them are *necessary* reaction products. The article uses products not as a chemical term (i.e. reactants and products) but as a practical term (what was "left" after the reactions) and this is a bit misleading.5. Finally, the article should be up-front about the reactions varying because of the physical processing of the various components, as well as their chemical composition. Black Powder has a wide (imho) range of compositions, even if we limit considerations to single pure components (KNO3, S, C) and this will *change* the reactions which occur - the speed, net energy release, and final residuals (both particulate (*why* oh, why they're referred to as "solids" here, IDK...no liquids (absorbed) present??) and gaseous. 6. OK, I know I said #5 would be last, but here is the hearsay: I've read from a semi-reliable source that black powder is currently being used in modern weapon systems. I can't recall if the use was as part of the propulsion system or part of the detonation chain. Claiming it is "obsolete" is like claiming horses are no longer used in "modern policing" - it's just not true.98.17.44.45 (talk) 07:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Big Ideas in Chemistry
— Assignment last updated by ChemWorx (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)