The point here is that the dogs would not detect thermite that uses aluminum rather than barium nitrate.
The point is you clearly don't understand what you are talking about. I don't think you know the difference between thermate and thermite or even what thermite is. The two seem to be interchangeable in your world.
Why would thermite use Aluminium
rather than Barium nitrate? What are you wibbling on about? Aluminium is fundamental to the thermite reaction. The addition of Ba(NO3)2 and sulphur to thermite creates thermate.
The main chemical reaction in thermate is the same as in thermite: an aluminothermic reaction between powdered aluminium and a metal oxide. In addition to thermite, thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase its thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature
Do you now understand the difference between thermate and thermite?
Did you work out why dogs can't sniff the Sulphur in Fe-O-S yet?
Now please go back and answer this post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7067850&postcount=413
ROFLMAO - Are you Karl Pilkington in disguise?
The dogs did not detect the sulfur, whatever the source.
So now it's back to thermate is it? In the Harrit et al paper please point to me where the Sulphur is, here's a handy sciency diagram to help you out:
Could you tell me why Silicon is used in thermite please?
Do you understand that any unreacted thermate in the dust would contain 2% Sulphur and 29% Barium Nitrate by definition! Thermate contains Sulphur and Barium Nitrate or it isn't bloody thermate! It would be called thermite.
C7 - Can you get me a drink of orange squash?
Sunstealer - Sure. (Hands it over)
C7 - but this is orange?
Sunstealer - yes, orange squash is orange.
C7 - But I wanted orange squash without the orange bit in it.
Sunstealer - Then why didn't you just ask for a glass of water?
Do you see? Do you see that a glass of orange squash without the squash is a glass of water?
Do you see that thermate without Sulphur and Barium Nitrate is thermite?
Right, that should have sunk in. Actually I'm not too sure if it has but we'll take a massive gamble and assume it has.
Now - if you are saying that the eutectic was created by thermate - which you have now been taught by definition contains Sulphur and Barium Nitrate, why the hell are you saying that the dogs couldn't detect the Sulphur because they used thermite which by definition contains no sulphur.
Do you see that your two statements contradict each other? It is very, very, very, simple.
If thermate was used (which by definition contains sulphur) then any unreacted thermate would be found because the dogs would smell the sulphur in it.
Now if there was no sulphur then thermite would have been used. But wait - thermite doesn't contain sulphur. So therefore thermite could not be the cause of the Fe-O-S eutectic. Simple, easy to follow logic.
Now let's start asking you some further questions.
Aluminium is readily soluble in liquid Iron and forms solid soluble phases as evidenced
here So we would expect to see aluminium in the surface corrosion products of the analysed steel beams that suffered high temperature corrosion from oxidation and sulphidation. We would also expect to see thermite reactant products such as Al2O3 in the slag.
Here are the 2 reports on the corrosion seen.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm
http://www.georgevandervoort.com/fa_lit_papers/World_Trade_Center.pdf
PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE ALUMINIUM/ALUMINUM/ALUMINA OR AL IS PRESENT IN THOSE DOCUMENTS
No aluminium = no thermite/thermate.
Sulfur dioxide is not elemental sulfur.
OMG - do you even understand why your statement is so ignorant within the context? Obviously not. Hey folks it seems that C7 is going to rewrite the books on that well known phenomenon called sulphidation. I look forward to him winning the nobel prize for chemistry/physics.
You seem to suffer the same delusion as Dr Jones; that the word "elemental" has some sort of magical property.
Why oh why do such ignorant people try to school others who have infinitely more knowledge than they do? Do you think that I would just make random crap up? Probably because this seems to be your MO.
It seems that C7 thinks only S
2 can cause sulphidation. Yo buddy here's a handy hint: Pull your head out of your rectum and go read a text book.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...Dge#v=onepage&q=sulfidation corrosion&f=false
I will study the papers you mentioned if I can find them. Do you have a URL?
The first thing that Google finds is Bazant's paper so I'll start with that.
Ha ha, looks like your google-fu is lacking. Why don't you pay for them? If you are serious about your research then a few dollars is an acceptable price to pay is it not?
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie50603a023
I will have to warn you though - papers contain science so you should take things very, very slowly because you will be overwhelmed. Infact I think you ignore it all completely just like you'd ignore someone speaking Swahili - you don't understand a word. Your posts are proof.
However, we all know that you are not serious about it and won't spend a single penny so here is the Greening paper that uses the above papers for the calculation.
Chemists have investigated the thermal decomposition of gypsum, CaSO4.2H2O or anhydrite, CaSO4, since the early 1900s because of its potential for making sulfuric acid by the liberation of SO2 or SO3 from a plentiful and inexpensive starting material /7/. It was known at this time that the direct reaction:
CaSO4= CaO + SO3 + O2
(followed by: SO3 + H2O = H2SO4), only proceeds at an acceptable rate at temperatures ~ 1400 °C.
However, early research showed that the above reaction could be accelerated by additives such as clay and, more importantly, the reduction of CaSO4 to CaO and SO2 by reaction with solid carbon or gaseous carbon monoxide was found to be possible at temperatures well below 1000 °C /8/. In these cases CaSO4 was decomposed by two novel reactions:
2CaSO4 + C = 2CaO + CO2 + 2SO2
and,
CaSO4 + CO = CaO + CO2 + SO2
Since the 1980s there been renewed interest in these reactions because of their role in the removal of SO2 from combustion gases by contact with lime (CaO) in so-called flue gas desufurisation processes, (See, for example /9/ and references contained therein.). As a consequence, the chemistry of calcium sulfate reduction has been investigated over a wide range of conditions. Thus, for example, R. Kuusik and co-workers (See Ref/10/), have reported details of the thermal decomposition of calcium sulfate in carbon monoxide/nitrogen mixtures and note that in 10 - 20 % CO/ N2, calcium sulfide, CaS, and carbon dioxide are formed at temperatures in the range 780 - 850 °C, while at CO concentrations below 10 %, calcium oxide, CaO, carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide are formed above 900 °C. Kuusik et al. also note that the
presence of impurities such as SiO2 in the calcium sulfate lower the decomposition temperatures by up to 100 °C.
Hey - did you manage to find out what happens to H
2O (water) at 100°C yet?
