Originally posted by pteridine100% metallic iron, proved to come from a reaction in the absence of air. How's that?
That's pretty piss poor. The sphere does not have to be 100% iron
to show a thermetic reaction.
The reaction does not have to occur in the absense of air either.
Do you really understand that an open environment cannot produce
the temperatures required to melt iron? It seems you don't understand
because it's right in your face and you still bring up the "inert gas" excuse.
I have proved that combustion occurred in the DSC and you did not understand it or won't admit it. See my previous posts using Jones own data.
Jones even alludes to it in his paper but is also wont to admit it. Page 27 "As this test was done in air it is possible that some of the enhancement
of energy output may have come from air oxidation of the organic component." Possible? Certain. They can't do arithmetic, either.
I have admitted this, and I have also quoted the same paragraph. it is
clear that some combustion took place. BUT SO WHAT PT?!
What does it matter? The combustion that took place in an ambient
environment cannot melt iron, let alone form it into a sphere!
If anything, the iron would have melted into a blob...some sort of random
shape, but certainly not a sphere!
The fact that Jones states that combustion took place also shows he's
smart enough to understand that the presence of air doesn't matter.
The sharp exotherm you see in the DSC is too rapid to stem from
combustion alone. Jones knows this too...however you have trouble
grasping this concept.
There is no need for me to calculate anything; first off because I don't know
how (like yourself), but more importantly you have to deal with the following items:
1. Spheres were produced
2. Spheres are attached to the chips
Just like "Stillresearching911" states, you are overlooking the obvious
because you know the complications of explaining points 1 & 2.
Nobody has successfully debated Jones, that says enough on its own.
[edit on 16-9-2009 by turbofan]