Jones' Dust Analysis - Common Arguments Addressed

I think you have some more research to perform my friend:

Nano-energetic materials:

Historically, pyrotechnic or explosive applications for traditional thermites have been limited due to their relatively slow energy release rates. But because nanothermites are created from reactant particles with proximities approaching the atomic scale, energy release rates are far improved.[2]

MICs or Super-thermites are generally developed for military use, propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics. Because of their highly increased reaction rate, nanosized thermitic materials are being researched by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs that are several times more powerful than conventional explosives.[3] Nanoenergetic materials can store higher amounts of energy than conventional energetic materials and can be used in innovative ways to tailor the release of this energy.

Source:
Gartner, John (Jan. 21, 2005). "Military Reloads with Nanotech". MIT Technology Review. www.technologyreview.com... Retrieved May 3, 2009.

Mark Basile has a B.S. in Chemical Engineering. His paper is forthcoming, however he has put his real name
and experience behind Jones' conclusions.

reply to post by turbofan


You missed most of my post in your response yet again, how are we supposed to have a discussion here?

With regards to Mark Basile, I was hoping you'd provide more information. I can't find a single paper with his full name on it, and while I find quite a few for "M Basile" they appear to be almost entirely by a physicist called "Maurizio Basile".

I'll wait for his paper, until then are we going to have a dialog?

What exactly did I leave out?

All of this:

the chemical formula beforehand which shows this to be quite a complex nano-thermite, augmented by Silicon and organic compounds in order to create this gas, that's why the paper studies 'gas generators'. This is not how high explosives work though, this reaction requires a primary thermite reaction, and a secondary reaction to produce the gas, wheras the primary reaction of high explosives is to transition to gas.

This is why they are so powerful and used as propellants in controlled demolition, and why there's no good reason to think it would be replaced with Thermite.

Was covered by this:

Historically, pyrotechnic or explosive applications for traditional thermites have been limited due to their relatively slow energy release rates. But because nanothermites are created from reactant particles with proximities approaching the atomic scale, energy release rates are far improved.[2]

MICs or Super-thermites are generally developed for military use, propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics. Because of their highly increased reaction rate, nanosized thermitic materials are being researched by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs that are several times more powerful than conventional explosives.[3] Nanoenergetic materials can store higher amounts of energy than conventional energetic materials and can be used in innovative ways to tailor the release of this energy.

My response covered the fact that nano materials do not necessarily require 'two stages' to produce gas (your
words), and that nano materials are superior to conventional explosives...which responds to your last sentence
about Thermite not being suitable in CD.

Originally posted by turbofan
What exactly did I leave out?
...
My response covered the fact that nano materials do not necessarily require 'two stages' to produce gas (your
words), and that nano materials are superior to conventional explosives...which responds to your last sentence
about Thermite not being suitable in CD.

You're not bothering to look at specifics here, just quoting sections of papers you think might agree with you. They do not, controlled demolition charges work in a specific manner which none of these papers are discussing.

Let me try another tactic, could you please explain in reasonable the physical process which the nanomaterial or nanomaterial enhanced explosive outperforms a normal linear shaped charge? You don't seem to be interested in the actual physical reactions, just in quoting things which superficially agree with you. I would like to discuss the actual reality of these charges, how exactly would they work etc.

I should also point out that in the interview you link to, Basile does not say that he has replicated Jones' findings. He says that his initial investigations lead him to agree that there's something odd going on, but that he has not run the DSC or even measured accurately the exotherm.

This is not a repetition of Jones' experiments. Even if 9/11 blogger would have you believe it is.

"Exponent",

In all fairness I'm trying to answer you line by line and with sourced material. If there's a point that
you feel I've overlooked, please rephrase the question.

As far as I'm concerned I have already commented on your previous request in a reasonable and logical
manner. I've also corrected you in two instances which seem to have been swept under the rug.

You're not bothering to look at specifics here, just quoting sections of papers you think might agree with you. They do not, controlled demolition charges work in a specific manner which none of these papers are discussing.

These papers discuss all of the above and more. If nano materials can be engineered to be more powerful
(greater heat and pressure) that conventional explosives, why can they not be used in a shaped charge
to cut columns?

Here's a paper that dicusses this very use:
engineering.missouri.edu...

Let me try another tactic, could you please explain in reasonable the physical process which the nanomaterial or nanomaterial enhanced explosive outperforms a normal linear shaped charge? You don't seem to be interested in the actual physical reactions, just in quoting things which superficially agree with you. I would like to discuss the actual reality of these charges, how exactly would they work etc.

See the paper linked above.

A fundamental component of any microsystem that uses nanothermites is a
suitable ignition source. One useful characteristic of a versatile ignition source is the
ability to trigger it using CMOS circuits, thus opening the possibility for unique
applications by use of simultaneous, or sequential, triggering of the events with great
precision.

In my words: a material that can be tailored to react using specific parameters, release enormous amounts
of heat in short bursts of time is a top candidate for controlled demolition use.

The ability to be more precise in timing of the charge ignition can only improve the demolition of a building.

Mark Basile's scientific process and review of Jones' paper:

www.youtube.com.../u/11/JZNQq7XBLwc

Arguement: Jones claims the chips are thermite

Response:

Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in
the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic
pyrotechnic or explosive material.

Source
www.bentham.org...

An excellent interview with Dr. Gash from LLNL whom explains the technology behind nano materials.

Quick Notes:
- nano materials combust four times faster than conventional macro/micro sized thermitic materials
- liquid iron production from thermite reaction
- gas production via hydro-carbon fuels to produce high pressure (pressure volume) explosives
- how nano materials become explosive due to their fast burn rate 7,000 meters per second (from 10 meters per
second of conventional thermite).
- customized temperatures, burn rates, light emissions


www.aerogel.org...

Originally posted by exponentBecause there's no such thing as 'powerful' in these terms. It reacted quicker, which results in the higher slope and greater peak. However, the area under the graph is the total heat emitted, and when you are trying to melt steel it is this that is more important than reaction rate.

Just found something as I was reading through so I'd correct yet another oversight.

"Exponent" claims there is no such term as powerful when describing energetic meterials like nano-thermite.
Once again, it is very easy to expose these anonymous internet debaters who rarely do research and therefore
know very little about the topic at hand.

Excerpt from LLNL, 2001.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/82a5e27e2f83.jpg[/atsimg]

There is also an audio interview by Dr. Gash linked in the prior reply where he uses the term powerful to describe
the nano-thermite.

It is also important to note that 'Exponent" is incorrect about the 'area under the curve'. Total heat required to
melt steel is achieved by rapid reaction. The heat is generated quickly and reaches temperature far and above
the melting point of steel.

This is what the term Power is all about. Power = Energy / Time

More energy produced (heat) in the smaller period of time equates to greater Power.

www.kpsec.freeuk.com...