tpo 30

The lecturer and the reading discuss the war between Roman and Greek. The Greek defended themselves by a new weapon, and they called a "burning mirror". Although the passage claims that this weapon was not possible and practical, and it brings several reasons. The speaker refutes this idea through several reasons which I will describe in this report.

First, the passage points out thatThe Greek people did not have enough technology for making a several meter parabolic mirror that could focus sunlight and made a fire. The lecturer, in contrast, rejects this by claiming that the Greek people did not need a single sheet to make a large mirror. They could use several small polish coppers and made a large mirror. They would directly assemble these a lot of pieces and made a parabolic mirror.

Furthermore, unlike the passage which states that making a fire with a mirror takes more than 10 min, and the ships must be stay and not moving, so the Greek people could not use it, because the Roman navy made by wood, so it needs more than 10 min to burn, and also they moved and not stied. The professor argues that it is true that the wood needs 10 min to set a ship on fire, but the Greek did not use only wood to make fire. They used other objects like a sticky piece between wood and waterproof, and they called it to pitch. The pitch started to burn in a few second, and when the pitch burned all the ships burned. Also, the pitch can burn even the ships moved.

Finally, although the reading passage says that the Greek people had another practical weapon like flaming arrows, so they did not need a mirror weapon. The speaker disagrees by mentioning that.
By mentioning that another weapon like a flame arrow was familiar for the Roman navy, but the mirror weapon was not. In this situation, the Roman navy only saw a big mirror, and suddenly Roman ships start to burning. So, they would not defend themselves. However, the Roman people had enough information about the flame arrows, so, they ready for attack to them.