TPO 30

The reading and the listening both discuss whether an innovating weapon called 'burning mirror' had existed in ancient Greek or not. The passage casts doubt on this issue by stating three reasons. However, the lecturer rejects the validity of explanations mentioned by the author.

First, the author claims that for the weapon to be effective, it must have been made from a single huge sheet of modified copper with a high parabolic value. Yet, the early Greeks were not that technologically developed to build such a sophisticated as well as an accurate weapon. Nonetheless, the lecturer states that early Greeks were skillful enough to manufacture burning mirrors because not only could these weapons have been made from smaller sheets, but also Greek scientists had had the ability to calculate how to shape the mirror adequately to be practical.

Second, according to the passage, an examination revealed that it takes at least ten minutes for wood to catch fire by these mirrors. Thus, the process needed for a burning mirror set Roman ships on fire could have been both time-consuming and unrealistic. The professor, on the other hand, refutes this explanation by explaining that wood was not the only component of Roman ships, another substance did exist in the body of the ships that could easily be burned by emitted radiations of the burning mirror. As a result, these weapons were highly feasible.

Third, the passage goes on to mention that the burning mirror in comparison with flaming arrows did have the very same function. For this, there was no advantage in the use of this mirror instead of flaming arrows. Nevertheless, the lecture opposes this idea by expressing that the Roman army was quite familiar with blazing arrows. Therefore, they could have readily extinguished the blaze raised in this way. However, they had no idea of what purposes could a burning mirror have, so they would fail to appropriately face the blaze in this way.