C4 sits at @ 1.73 g/cm3; while PETN is about 1.75 g/cm3 - it's less an issue of density in my opinion (talking as a bomb tech here, not as someone who's made explosive projectiles haha) - more the sensitivity issue, or relative lack-of for C4. C4 is *designed* to be stable and safe to handle on the battlefield, so it needs a nice "kick" to set it off (to very simplify things). PETN on the other hand, in pure form, is much more sensitive to insult, and thus would be easier to initiate in that small of an amount. Yet, as pointed out, make it *too* sensitive and the reaction from firing will set off the round in the chamber.I agree, but had no data on density (or volume ratio of shell to charge). I use what I can Google as a starting point.
Any idea the density of PETN?
BUT - I agree with several of the posters, and would hand-wave it in my games as well. Given that Traveller already postulates gravitationally-polarized explosives as canon (and, man, I would LOVE to have the chance to play with something like that IRL!), I'm willing to accept that a couple thousand years from now they've also developed a way to make a 10mm explosive projectile.
Similarly, given the intended use-case of zero-G combat, I would want to remove as much mechanical action as possible, partly due to the inertia factors and partly to reduce points of failure from items trying to move in vacuum. Instead of a rotating cylinder, I'd look at a fixed cartridge with multiple barrels, and electrically fire the above-mentioned caseless rounds. Put in some sort of piston-capture system to help contain the gasses and counter the recoil action.
Oh, and there's a whole lot of that concept which *isn't* theoretically, and has actually been deployed for almost 40 years. Say hello to the underwater snub-gun - The Heckler and Koch P11:
HK P11
That's been out there since 1976, and the Russians have their own version the SPP-1.