[RTH]

I have read the forum rules several times before posting this, but I don't want to make a faux pas, and cause trouble for UKSGC. What is the status of propellant grade i.e. low -explosives?
I know that high explosives are explicitly forbidden, but what is the status of things like nitrocellulose (a propellant)? (Yes, Ragnarok, I know that depending on the mode of use nc can be considered a high explosive).
I ask this because I found some methods of perparing nitroglycerine and nitrocellulose in an old chemistry textbook that my school was chucking away. Obviously nitroglycerine is forbidden, but I think nitrocellulose may have a valid part in discussions of alternative methods of propelling potatoes. However, I don't want to cause problems for UKSGC (or myself, for that matter) - so I thought it would be best to consult before posting.

Reuben

[Cornishtiger]

I think it is my place to answer this one.

I love to see people trying to push the boundaries.
If you want to experiment yourself then go ahead.
If you believe you can improve on the existing than do it.
If you want to post general results and some pictures of equipment or damage shots its all good.
However I do not want to see methods of preparing explosives of any kind posted.
Any posts deemed to be promoting behaviour that is dangerous or that contravene the forum rules will be edited and/or deleted.
I hope that doesnt sound to nasty but that it gets the point across with no grey areas.

[RTH]

Yes, that is why I asked. No, I think it's sensible, and no, it does not sound nasty. I would like to experiment, yes, but I doubt I'd be able to get the concentrated acids (and even though I am in 6th form now I doubt my chemistry teachers would help me). Thanks for the answer.

[Ragnarok]

If I had even suggested I wanted help making such things to my chemistry teachers, I think they would have arranged to have had me bound and gagged, while they went to burn the library and destroy the internet, as well as recovering all black market fissionable material, just to be sure.

You see, I got all of the "Most Dangerous Student", "Most likely to become a mass murderer" and "Likely to be an evil genius" awards in the year book, although they did make up as many awards as they wanted, so everyone ended up with at least one.

There were such awards as "Most likely to be fired by Sir Alan Sugar", "Most likely to kill with a lawnmower", "First real life Italian job driver", "Most likely to wake up in a different country", "Most lethal use of a badminton racket", "Most desperate for an award", and to top it all off "Best resembles a kitchen appliance"
As you can see, my school wasn't very sensible.

But other than it being forbidden from the forum discussion, I can see several different reasons for not using nitroglycerine. Just a few to start with: "Class 1 explosive", "Low activation energy" and "exothermic formation"

But if you want to try nitrocellulose, don't let me stop you. I just hope you do better than the Brainiac teams pitiful attempt to do so: "Oh look, we can chuck a melon 20 feet."

[ALIHISGREAT]

hmm most likely to become a mass murderer lol, i would kill to get that award

[Ragnarok]

Let's just say, I may have had something to do with who got the "Never here/Most Absent" award.

[RTH]

I got "Most likely to attempt world domination/destroy the planet deliberately" which I found rather amusing. My chemistry teachers generally don't mind me asking questions - my teacher even explained why the reaction needs sulphuric acid (to form NO2+ ions) - we had a 5 minute discussion about the nitration of aromatic compounds. One of my teachers in the past would even have set aside a lunchtime to do the practical with me - it's a shame he left.

I have to admit that I think Brainiac is cr*p - it has bad science, puerile presenters and it is extremely sexist. If I justwanted to be destructive (in order to be more impressive) I could put nitrocelluloes in the melon, wrapped around a (for example) a party popper - detonation rather than deflagration for added power!

[Ragnarok]

I totally agree, and often, even though they're much better, I feel the Mythbusters also fall short on some things.

[RTH]

Thank you - so many people call me a philistine of popular culture (though not in those words) that I dislike Brainiac. I quite like mythbusters, but I think sometimes they modify their parameters outside the range required to even make a myth plausible. I liked the IWC parodies of mythbusters (thanks for pointing IWC out). I kind of want to do a webcomic myself, because I have so many jokes (science and maths, mainly) I have created/illustrated on my computer, but I have no idea where to start. Ah well.

[Ragnarok]

I'll admit that Brainaic does a couple of alright things, and some explosions, but it's mostly junk. And they can never match the Mythbusters explosions:
"Hmm, we can't get this cement out of this truck with explosives. Let's remove the truck from around the cement with even more explosives."

The Mythbusters experiments are still a bit questionable. There should be some grading to their experiments not: "Hmm, the original parameters don't fit. Lets use 20 times more of an explosive that's three times more powerful, then try that... oh, it exploded."
Good TV, but not a great experimental method.

I did have some ideas about a webcomic, and did have some points for and against it. It was mostly for, but my sense of humour is a bit weird, so I'd need to tame it, or else play up the story a lot at the expense of individual gags. I do actually like several webcomics that do this sort of thing, but I think I might push the story telling a bit too far at the expense of the jokes.

There's an interesting trick I've noticed since I drew the test comics (One frame of mine in various states of development here. That was before I really learnt to draw properly so the proportions are a bit off. It was done manually except for the background [an experiment in digital colouring], with fineliners and felt tip pens.) - if you use animals as your main characters instead of people, you can use a simple "generic" expression quite often (the most complex bit really, expressions), and also makes it easier to "reproduce" the characters - but it's not too hard to depict any emotion you want.
It also helps the viewers identify your characters should you take them out of "costume", as long as you don't make all the characters come from only a couple of species. And you can work more jokes with it as well.

That idea's mostly stolen from "The Whiteboard" . It's not on a whiteboard any more (only the 5 first ones and a few other later strips ever were), but don't hold that against it. Sciency humour, a good webcomic technique to follow, and about 850 strips to read through. Probably your cup of tea as well, and despite it's basic paintball theme, you don't need to know any of that to enjoy it. As for how I came across the comic, I followed a link from IWC.

Actually that all said, I might try some more test strips, and consider getting into it again... But, damn, you can tell I've read too many "The making of ..." pages.

[RTH]

Hmmm... Yes, my sense of humour is rather weird, but some people like it. Here's an example:



(I don't actually have imaginary friends, but it makes a good joke). That was the first one, and there are quite a few more of that ilk. The art is poor, but I feel it is sufficient to convey the joke. When I find the .svg original, I'll reduce it in size.

[Ragnarok]

Looks like quite a bit like xkcd to me, and not just because of the stick figures. xkcd is popular enough, so that could be a good combination.

[RTH]

I would never copy his ideas, but they were inspiration for me to actually draw out humorous sketches. The only reason I do stick figure is because I'm too lazy to do anything complex.

EDIT: Here are someothers that I bothered putting on the web a while ago:

http://i239.photobuc...omical_H/sc.png
http://i239.photobuc...mical_H/rps.png
http://i239.photobuc...al_H/roflol.png
http://i239.photobuc...omical_H/qt.png
http://i239.photobuc...mical_H/ms3.png
http://i239.photobuc...mical_H/ms2.png
http://i239.photobuc..._H/motorway.png
http://i239.photobuc.../hamletsbox.png

[Ragnarok]

Oh, by no means was I implying you were copying or plagarising xkcd.
But xkcd is popular enough, so your stick figures and science jokes are by no means a bad choice for a webcomic.
Being entirely truthful, if you did have a webcomic, I'd read it. That's my kind of humour. Although, I have been amused by practically evert Schrodinger joke I have ever read really.

I've been practising drawing animals of various varieties in comic form for the last few hours. I wouldn't be ashamed to publish them, so I might go for it.
I'll piece together some whole comics first of course.

[RTH]

I wouldn't be able to do comics serially, because I doubt I could come up with a consistent plot; mere jokes are my thing. Definitely go for it - I can barely draw, but here's one I have not done on the computer:



I don't know why, but I quite like old scifi - Clarke, Phillip K. Dick, Asimov etc... Also, I'm quite a fan of Microsoft (looking for hints on how to manage an evil empire ), but my alter ego wants to run Debian.

[Ragnarok]

Well, I have the reverse situation. Not good with the individual jokes, but I can manage a plot.

The main trick to the plot is to create characters in great depth, which then creates the plot pretty automatically. All of the character design I did when I did tabletop games (mostly for Inquisitor though) may actually be vaguely useful.

It may surprise you, but there are very few people on this planet that could not draw/paint/sculpt at a very high level (save for people with right side brain damage, who may have difficulty), and it's not at all hard either.
The solution is easy enough to learn, but it's not an obvious one, so that's why artists can remain "mystical".

It's all to do with using the right brain instead of the left brain.
Left brain supression is a good feeling, rather like alcohol (as that is one of the main effects of alcohol, to limit the left hemisphere), but you don't get art hangovers.
It does limit your awareness of time passing though, so it that's something to watch out for.

When it's done, you both gain a huge boost in artistic talent (the right brain is well wired for creativity, but the typically dominant left brain uses "symbols") and also become less critical if you should make a mistake (that's the left brain's job normally).

There's all kinds of books on learning how to achieve this, and my explanation will pale before that, but trust me when I say art doesn't have to be hard.

[RTH]

I used to occasionally play tabletop games, but generally not roleplaying games. Necromunda, Space Hulk etc., all dug out of a friends garage. You say that you can create characters; I would find this difficult because I'm not the best person for understanding how people "tick". I can manage joke because I'm always bouncing thoughts around in my head.

I personally don't know what alcohol does to one's perception, but I can certainly sympathise with limited awareness of time passing. Would you be able to recommend any books in particular?

[Ragnarok]

A good, but large book is "Drawing on the right side of the brain" by Betty Edwards. There is now a newer edition than the one I used as well, originally titled "The new drawing on the right side of the brain". Probably worth trying, but if you can find it there, you might want to borrow it from your local library or something first to assess it for your needs.

[RTH]

I'll try to get that from the library when I can. Thanks.

EDIT: I've ordered it from the library. It should come sometime next week.

[Animal]

Well if we ever had an off topic topic this is it

Bring it back to earth please

Animal