Another invention quiz this week; an intrepid American and an unlikely episode in the history of cinema.
In 1866, John Wesley Hyatt discovered that when he spilled in his workshop a bottle of a synthetic substance called collodion, it hardened into a tough but still pliable material which, it struck him, would be ideal for the production of something necessary for a pastime which was at that time rapidly growing in popularity in the U.S. (and is still popular today, though not to the same extent). Until this point, the objects in question had to made from an expensive, natural substance that could not, in fact, be obtained in North America. A shortage of the natural substance left widely felt need, among players and manufacturers, for a cheap alternative.
Hyatt eventually created synthetic versions of this object, out of a substance called nitrocellulose resin. The results were impressive -- the cheaply produced objects were every bit as servicable as the ones made from the rare natural substance. The only problem was, these objects had a tendency to throw off sparks and a bang when struck, which was a constant and inevitable aspect of the their use. Eventually the formula was refined, and the substance Hyatt had used went on to become the basis for celluloid film.
What were these in-demand objects Hyatt wanted to use nitrocellulose to make? Bonus points: what was the natural substance which he hoped to make unnecessary?
If you're new to the quiz, our only rule is that you rely on your intra-cranial search engine only. First correct answer to comments wins a satisfyingly heavy pen decorated handsomely with the logo of a not-quite-deceased tech consulting firm.
Posted by BT at June 07, 2002 12:12 AMPool balls, which were originally made of ivory. Another drawback of the nitrocelluose variety was their tendency to burst into flames when a high-roller would stub his cigar out on one.
Posted by: rob on June 7, 2002 12:33 AMthat comment above must be right
i was thinking ping pong balls though (which would result in a much more dangerous projectile)
thanks for putting the quiz up when it is actually friday here
Posted by: art on June 7, 2002 01:32 AMCurses, Rob got there too fast. So we've all read that book about plastic, eh? (Called, if memory serves me... 'Plastic'.) A cracker of a non-fiction read, too. Completely changed my attitude to the stuff.
Posted by: Rory on June 7, 2002 02:44 AMGot it in one, Rob. Congratulations on your first Wombat File victory -- and establishing our earliest decision time yet.
I actually found the mention in David Bodanis's The Secret House. Anybody have an author on this Plastic book?
Posted by: BT on June 7, 2002 07:28 AMYou know, I think I read that bit in Omni magazine sometime back in the late '70s-early '80s. No idea why it stuck with me.
Posted by: rob on June 7, 2002 08:35 AMMan, it's hard to track down a book called 'Plastic' when you can't remember the author or subtitle... but googling for "book plastic history -surgery" yielded this number five result, which is indeed the book in question:
http://www.thenetnet.com/readme/plastic.html
The good thing about Fenichell's book is that it isn't just an anti-plastic diatribe taking easy shots at everyone's favourite environmental bugbear. It gives you a better awareness of the problems plastic has *solved* as well as caused.
Posted by: Rory on June 7, 2002 09:17 AMDo another one!
Posted by: bootsy on June 7, 2002 09:48 AMBowling pins?
Posted by: boxjam on June 7, 2002 10:17 AMSeltzer!
Posted by: scott on June 7, 2002 11:05 AM[mlang]
WHISKEY REBELLION!
[/mlang]
Risky web hellion!
(oops, brackets!) that was...
[mercury rev spooner]
Risky web hellion!
[/mrs]
[much too late for the joke]
1690
[/mtlftj]