• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Micro Spheres in world trade center dust solved.

wait a min Frank posted about Fly Ash days ago here.

I cant find his post. maybe it was at blogger or was quoted in an email and posted somewhere. I KNOW i saw it.



http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3269290#post3269290


Money quote:

Thanks RedIbis....

I am not questioning Jones' data, I am questioning his interpretation of said data.

You need to take a look at Volume III of the famous "Particle Atlas" by Walter McCrone. This provides scanning electron micrographs and EDX spectra for thousands of common materials. The section from pages 760 - 780 is most interesting since it shows flyash microspheres from large domestic waste incinerators burning paper, wood and plastics as well as flyash from coal-fired furnaces. The EDX spectra show major peaks from Al, Si, K, Ca, and Fe together with smaller peaks from Ti, S and Cl.

Jones' spectra are a perfect match for FLY ASH!
 
The streets in Gravy's town are paved with Magnetite.
http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/cfa52.htm


However it is important to remember there are two types wet and dry, wet usually has the magnetite removed magneticly and is used in structural concrete.



IT is also important to remember it can also be used with sand and lime as a soil stabilizer.
OR by itself as fill for heavy machinery roads bases.
It is also very abundant and cheap in New York city, actually cheaper than sand.
Since it is a waste product that usually goes in a landfill.
http://www.rmajko.com/soilstab.htm
Sounds like a leading hypothesis to me. I would love to put this on my site. I can't wait to see the complete hypothesis. :)
 
Sorry, but I'm at the limit of my knowledge. I inspected a plant once that made cinder block out of fly ash. I only know that, when wet, fly ash is like quicksand in it "suckability" (I stepped in some accidentally, and it pulled my shoe off my foot. :D)

I do know that burning coal fuel in boilers leaves slag deposits. Otherwise, I'll wait until y'all that are in on the secret feel it's OK to reveal it to us commoners. :)

Exactly that is why when mixed with lime it helps to stabilize loose soils. The alumina is very water absorbent like a sponge.
The magnetite in fly ash actually attracts charged Ions.
 
Fly ash is often added to cement to make lighter-weight concretes. I'm not sure if any were used in the WTC floor pans or not. It's possible, since they were non-structural members (well, more or less).
 
Explain how microsphere results impact MAX-MIHOP

I must be slow.

If there are numerous highly-credible non-CD explanations for the iron microspheres, what does that have to do with MAX-MIHOP? My model doesn't lean on the stuff.

In fact, I suspect part of the reason I got tossed from STJ911 is exactly because I said, in big bold letters, that the microspheres are going to be a dead end because of chain of custody issues, and because - as NIST so kindly warned us in FAQ #12 - thermite residue tests are inconclusive.


Sometimes I think I'm even more JREF NISTIAN than you guys.


Max They Hate Our Freedoms Photon

(How was that?)
 
I must be slow.

If there are numerous highly-credible non-CD explanations for the iron microspheres, what does that have to do with MAX-MIHOP? My model doesn't lean on the stuff.

In fact, I suspect part of the reason I got tossed from STJ911 is exactly because I said, in big bold letters, that the microspheres are going to be a dead end because of chain of custody issues, and because - as NIST so kindly warned us in FAQ #12 - thermite residue tests are inconclusive.


Sometimes I think I'm even more JREF NISTIAN than you guys.


Max They Hate Our Freedoms Photon

(How was that?)


(From NIST's FAQ)


The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.
Furthermore, a very large quantity of thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited) or another incendiary compound would have had to be placed on at least the number of columns damaged by the aircraft impact and weakened by the subsequent fires to bring down a tower. Thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and can require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.
 
I must be slow.

If there are numerous highly-credible non-CD explanations for the iron microspheres, what does that have to do with MAX-MIHOP? My model doesn't lean on the stuff.

In fact, I suspect part of the reason I got tossed from STJ911 is exactly because I said, in big bold letters, that the microspheres are going to be a dead end because of chain of custody issues, and because - as NIST so kindly warned us in FAQ #12 - thermite residue tests are inconclusive.


Sometimes I think I'm even more JREF NISTIAN than you guys.


Max They Hate Our Freedoms Photon

(How was that?)


But Max... what does your model lean on? Certainly not evidence.
 
I must be slow.
Keen insight!
If there are numerous highly-credible non-CD explanations for the iron microspheres, what does that have to do with MAX-MIHOP? My model doesn't lean on the stuff.
That's the beauty of your model, it doesn't "lean" on any facts therefore it's impervious to revelations like this.

Well Done Max
 
Keen insight!
That's the beauty of your model, it doesn't "lean" on any facts therefore it's impervious to revelations like this.

Well Done Max



Max's model has grown too shopworn for the runway. She leans on the kindness of strangers at this juncture.
 
Fly ash is often added to cement to make lighter-weight concretes. I'm not sure if any were used in the WTC floor pans or not. It's possible, since they were non-structural members (well, more or less).

In those concretes, the magnetite particles are undesirable, so water is added, and a magnet is used to remove the magnetite, Fe304.
So no those floor pans are unlikely to be the source of the micro spheres.
However Cement board, and tiles and other concretes might use it asphalts, and the sand and aggregates trucked in to make roads might just be.
 
I must be slow.

If there are numerous highly-credible non-CD explanations for the iron microspheres, what does that have to do with MAX-MIHOP? My model doesn't lean on the stuff.

In fact, I suspect part of the reason I got tossed from STJ911 is exactly because I said, in big bold letters, that the microspheres are going to be a dead end because of chain of custody issues, and because - as NIST so kindly warned us in FAQ #12 - thermite residue tests are inconclusive.


Sometimes I think I'm even more JREF NISTIAN than you guys.


Max They Hate Our Freedoms Photon

(How was that?)
Your model with respect to 9/11 rests on fantasy. I already know you have nothing to worry about, your ideas are so far removed from the reality of 9/11 you are safe from the micro spheres.
 
Last edited:
In those concretes, the magnetite particles are undesirable, so water is added, and a magnet is used to remove the magnetite, Fe304.
So no those floor pans are unlikely to be the source of the micro spheres.
However Cement board, and tiles and other concretes might use it asphalts, and the sand and aggregates trucked in to make roads might just be.
I think the USGS had fly ash in the concrete from the samples they found around the WTC. They had sourced the Fe and fly ash to concrete. I look these things up once and do not file them. Back to the search, which the first time was on a thread far, far, away.
 
In those concretes, the magnetite particles are undesirable, so water is added, and a magnet is used to remove the magnetite, Fe304.
So no those floor pans are unlikely to be the source of the micro spheres.
However Cement board, and tiles and other concretes might use it asphalts, and the sand and aggregates trucked in to make roads might just be.
Interesting, but since iron microspheres were sought by investigators as markers of WTC dust (in some cases at a considerable distance from the site), because they weren't present in background dust, I don't know where that leaves your idea.
 
Interesting thread. Waiting for Frank to give his ideas, and some info about his e-mail conversations with Jones :cool:
 
I think the USGS had fly ash in the concrete from the samples they found around the WTC. They had sourced the Fe and fly ash to concrete. I look these things up once and do not file them. Back to the search, which the first time was on a thread far, far, away.

Yes they did, however they did not say which concrete, magnetic magnetite separation has been going on since the 1960s with the bi product sold as sand blasting abrasive and for washing cleaning coal.
As well as many other uses.

Concrete board, tile, grout and asphalt products however use dry fly ash, until the mid 1990s no one had figured out a way to commercially remove the magnetite from it.

You basically have three grades of Fly Ash only one grade gos into structural concrete, or concrete flooring, that is Hydrated magnetic separated fly ash without micro spheres.

However Hydrated pond bottom fly ash un separated goes into grouts, concrete boards, tiles, or ceramics.

Non Hydrated Fly ash, goes into asphalt products, and road bed stabilization with lime or concrete.

That is why Dr. Jones found no fly ash micro-spheres in the concrete they were removed using the same technique that he used to search for them.
The micro spheres are one of the more valuable parts of the fly ash, and have been separated and sold for years before the fly ash goes into concrete.
 
CC:

Great Work. Look forward to a complete Description/Discussion.

Max:

I do not think anyone here has been attacking your theory. There are lots of threads to do that in. Sit back and enjoy the discussion as a fellow JREF NISTIAN...lol

TAM:)
 
Some Recent E-mail Exchanges with Steven Jones

Steven,

I would like to contribute to this research, so I will answer your questions
about OXYGEN, etc.......

It is well known that oxygen is not well characterized by EDX, especially
EDX done on old instruments. In fact, if you look in McCrone's book, which
was published in 1973, none of the samples show oxygen peaks! Thus we have
entry 432 "Zinc Oxide" which only has peaks for zinc! Clearly, the absence
of oxygen peaks does not mean the absence of oxygen in the sample! The
spectra in McCrone's book were probably recorded with an electronic "gate"
to eliminate low energy X-rays entirely. This was done because so-called
pulse pile-up of low-energy X-rays in first generation EDX instruments
caused detector saturation. Thus the low-energy peaks were not recorded.
This is why the lightest element reported in any sample listed in McCrone's
book is Na with an X-ray at 1.04 keV. Nevertheless, McCrone's Particle Atlas
remains a very useful source of X-ray data of dusts, minerals, etc.

Even using a modern EDX instrument I would be very careful about quoting a quantitative oxygen number. Why is this? Well, light elements like carbon,
oxygen and nitrogen emit very low energy X-rays ~ 0.5 keV or less. These
X-rays are not very penetrating and have trouble escaping from the surface
of the sample and passing through the window of the detector. However,
oxygen also tends to chemisorb on the surface of many materials, enhancing
the oxygen peak. The net result is that oxygen is not reliably measured by
EDX. For this reason I used Auger electron analysis, with a touch of
argon-ion sputtering to removed chemisorbed species, to quantify elements
like C, O, N, in fly ash. This technique does not use X-ray emission to
detect elements.

Now as for the particular spectrum in McCrones's book I forwarded to you, it was just one example of a combustion-related material that has microspheres
and high iron. I will forward the spectrum of the incinerator ash as well.
It shows microspheres and iron is present in significant concentrations too.
But please remember McCrone's sample was NOT magnetically separated. I am
quite sure a magnetically separated ash sample, such as the one you have for
the WTC dust, would show high iron by definition!

And one final point, my good friend Carrol Sanders has reminded me that fly ash is frequently used as aggregate in lightweight concrete, so microspheres may have been present in the Twin Tower's concrete even before the fires of 9/11. Given that so much concrete was pulverized during the collapse of the towers, fly ash debris would be present in large amounts in the rubble pile.

Regards, Frank

----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Jones
To: greening
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: Query

Frank,

1. As you read my query, you'll notice that I said I thought some sort of
cooperation could be worked out -- with you. When I made reference to those "hell-bent" on discrediting discoveries I was not thinking about you , but rather two or three others, out of perhaps a couple hundred collaborators I have worked with. I learned to be very careful before forming
collaborations.

At the same time, it is true I would have to get to know you better before
establishing a full collaboration if such were desired.

2. "Al : Si : S : K : Ca : Ti : Fe = 8 : 10 : 2 : 1 : 4 : 1 : 5"

a. Where is the oxygen? Oxygen is a major component of almost all the
iron-aluminum spheres in the WTC dust I have studied -- often the PRINCIPAL component.

b. How do these "fly-ash" spheres form, given the high melting point of
iron (about 1530 C)? Do the incinerators use forced-air?

Thanks for your comments, which I will consider more tomorrow.

Steven
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

Frank,

1. The plot you provided is from burning COAL, not paper, plastics, wood
etc. Or are you saying there was coal in the WTC?

2. Where is the oxygen in the spectrum? The oxygen content is
significant, yet the spectrum appears to be skewed, cut off at low X-ray
energies... please explain -- how much Oxygen was present? Oxygen must be
present in a spectrum to provide a match with spectra I have shown -- not
the case in the one example you provided!

All of the iron-aluminum spheres I have found in the WTC dust show abundant
OXYGEN. Often O is the principal element in the spheres.

3. Can you get a Fe-O-K-Al-Si spectrum (with oxygen, O) and sphere
production from burning office materials? A few examples please -- if you
can do it.

4. This coal (your reference) was burned at high temperatures -- the
caption refers to "high stoker temperature." This is a significant
difference from the WTC fires -- or -- Are you claiming such high temps
occurred in the WTC fires? Hot enough to produce iron-rich spheres? (Iron
melts at 1538 C)


Steven J


Reply sent Dec 25th:

Steven,

So, Steven, may I review where we presently stand in this debate. You have carried out EDX analysis of samples of WTC dust and claim that two types of particles detected by you in the dust serve as evidence for the use of thermite/thermate incendiary devices during the destruction of the towers. These particles are microspheres and thin “chips” that are iron and aluminum-rich. Since thermite is essentially a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum, and spherical particles are evidence of melting, you believe that Fe and Al in microspheres can only be attributable to thermite residues. (Am I correct so far?)

Now here you have me at a disadvantage because you have not published or made any of your EDX spectra available to me. The best I have to work with are video clips of some talks you have given where you show some overheads of EDX spectra. If I am to really get to grips with your research I need to see copies of the spectra. And, by the way, I notice you immediately posted the spectrum I sent to you on 9//blogger, but did not post one of your spectra for comparison. Why not? My spectrum is from a book that is readily available in any good science library, but the same cannot be said about your spectra.

Anyway, to return to the debate, I have countered your argument that the WTC dust contains thermite residues with the suggestion that your particles are more likely to be fly ash from the combustion of materials in the Twin Towers. As evidence I have offered two examples of EDX spectra that I found in McCrone’s Particle Atlas. In one of my e-mails I gave you some approximate peak height ratios from these spectra as an indicator of the elemental ratios in the samples because the Particle Atlas does not give any quantitative analytical data.

I know full well that peak height ratios in EDX spectra are not directly proportional to the elemental concentrations in the sample. There are X-ray absorption and emission coefficients that need to be considered which are sample-matrix dependent. Nevertheless, peak height ratios do offer some approximate indication of the sample composition, especially for elements with similar atomic weights. Thus I have at least demonstrated that iron and aluminum-rich microspheres may be produced by the combustion of carbonaceous materials such as coal, wood, cardboard and paper.

Now I see you are quibbling about me sending you the spectrum of coal ash, asking me somewhat rhetorically: Was coal being burnt in the Twin Towers? Here, I would say you are missing my point which is that the mineral matter in natural carbon-based fuels forms an ash residue after the fuel is combusted that always contains Al, Si, K, Ca, and Fe – precisely the most abundant elements, (after the ubiquitous oxygen), in your WTC samples as revealed by their EDX spectra!

And here it is my turn to quibble with a statement you made in your Boston talk of Decembe15th, 2007. In this talk you compare the EDX spectra of red chips and microspheres found in WTC dust samples with the spectrum from commercial thermite and claim that all the spectra are essentially the same because they show peaks from O, Al, Fe, K, and Si. Now this is indeed quite strange because Si is definitely NOT an ingredient of commercial thermite. What is even stranger is that in your Boston talk you do not mention S as a component of the microspheres. Yet sulfur was so important to you just a few months ago – you know, back when you claimed that S was a key ingredient in the thermate variety of thermite used to demolish the Twin Towers. Now apparently, S has undergone a transmutation into Si! Perhaps this is why in your Boston talk you use the word “thermite” in place of your usual “thermate”. So what is it Steven: thermite or thermate?

But the presence of Si in your samples is indeed very significant because Si is always found in the ash produced by the combustion of wood, paper or municipal waste. So let’s focus on ash from these materials because wood, paper and municipal waste would be quite similar to the office combustibles feeding the WTC fires. Furthermore, municipal solid waste MSW combustor ash is well characterized. See for example:

http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/mswcal.htm

Thus we see that MSW ash typically contains up to 21 % Si, 8 % Ca, 8 % Fe, 1 % K and 5 % Al. Spherical particles up to 60 microns in diameter have also been reported in MSW incinerator ash formed when this type of waste material is burned at ~ 1000 deg C:

http://suwic.group.shef.ac.uk/posters/p-ash.pdf

There is also considerable data available on the properties of ash from the combustion of pulp and paper waste. See for example:

www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk1/tape4/PQDD_0032/MQ64248.pdf

Here we find that Si, Al, Ca and Fe are the main elements found in ash produced by burning pulp and paper wastes. In addition the major portion of the fly ash thus derived is formed as molten droplets of fused inorganic material found in the as-received pulp and paper feed. It is reported that fusion of minerals such as quartz, feldspar and clay results in the formation of glassy spherical particles.

So, Steven, I think you need to eliminate all of these naturally occurring spherical particles that are routinely formed in office fires – particles like your WTC microspheres that are rich in Si, Al, Ca, Fe, and K - before you start suggesting that such particles could only come from thermite, (themate?) combustion residues.

Frank


----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Jones
To: greening
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 11:16 AM

Subject: High temps needed to form iron-rich spheres, meaning of ratios
"Only the very lowest melting substances form spheres." -- quoting directly from the figure caption of the spectrum you sent. I agree with THAT comment. The caption also mentions "metal foil" as part of the incinerated material, and I suspect melted aluminum would be present. NOT melted iron! Which leads again to the question I posed to you yesterday, based on the first spectrum you sent, which you seem to have thus far neglected:

4. This coal (your reference) was burned at high temperatures -- the caption refers to "high stoker temperature." This is a significant difference from the WTC fires -- or -- Are you claiming such high temps occurred in the WTC fires? Hot enough to produce iron-rich spheres? (Iron melts at 1538 C)

With regard to the lack of oxygen peaks in the older EDX machine you showed, I understand the difficulty these machines had -- and accept your explanation that an older EDX system was used for these spectra. The version I am using was installed very recently and is state-of-the-art. I will ask the lab director how good the oxygen percentages are in this new system.

Meanwhile, this new system does provide percentages of Fe, Al, Oxygen, etc.
So I have to ask -- what is the meaning of the ratios you provided, e.g.,

"Al : Si : S : K : Ca : Ti : Fe = 8 : 10 : 2 : 1 : 4 : 1 : 5"

When you answer this, we can make more direct comparisons with the percentages provided by the new EDS system. (Take your time as I'm traveling to be with family for Christmas. Merry Christmas! btw, and I wish you a speedy recovery as a friend tells me you had surgery recently.)

Thanks for the conversation.

Steven

PS -- some time ago, we crushed a concrete sample obtained from the WTC rubble, used magnetic concentration, and looked for iron-rich spheres. There were NONE found.
 
Yes they did, however they did not say which concrete, magnetic magnetite separation has been going on since the 1960s with the bi product sold as sand blasting abrasive and for washing cleaning coal.
As well as many other uses.


You don't list sheetrock as a use of fly ash. Is there a reason for this for the purpose of this discussion?

 
I must be slow.

If there are numerous highly-credible non-CD explanations for the iron microspheres, what does that have to do with MAX-MIHOP? My model doesn't lean on the stuff.

In fact, I suspect part of the reason I got tossed from STJ911 is exactly because I said, in big bold letters, that the microspheres are going to be a dead end because of chain of custody issues, and because - as NIST so kindly warned us in FAQ #12 - thermite residue tests are inconclusive.


Sometimes I think I'm even more JREF NISTIAN than you guys.


Max They Hate Our Freedoms Photon

(How was that?)
Sometimes, it's not all about you.
 

Back
Top Bottom