Yes, it's called providing evidence.
You aren't sorry at all. Just inconvenienced because I noticed your little ruse.
If you have the answer to my question then just give to me. I am not going to be taking a quiz.
Not now I know why you are asking.
So you don't know what thermite is and you have absolutely no intention of finding out the truth. OK.
Well here goes anyway. I asked you in good faith and I apologised in good faith even though I simply asked you to answer a very simple question.
The classic thermite reaction is
Fe2O3 +Al --> 2Fe + Al2O3 which is exothermic.
In order for this reaction to take place it must be initiated using heat. A high temperature is required. Usually magnesium ribbon.
However, if you take a 1 kg block of Fe2O3 and a 1 Kg block of Al and tried to ignite them with a magnesium ribbon the thermite reaction will not occur. But if you have 1 Kg of
powdered reactants mixed together then the thermite reaction will proceed rather nicely. (I'm ignoring stoichiometric ratios for the time being)
Do you see why it's important that the reactants are in powder form rather than bulk?
Now powder gives us some problems. If you are going to use powders to melt through steel columns then you will need a device capable of holding the powder. (Yes I'm aware of Jon Cole's experiments) or you need a binder to hold the powder together.
What this does in effect is make the reaction more efficient per Kg because you now have a far better chance of all of your reactants reacting.
So thermite goes of, melts through columns and WTC collapses yeah?
Now then. Why would I want to use way, way, way more thermite than I actually need to do the job? I've got to get my NWO operatives to get all this material into a building un-noticed and rig up all these devices. Why am I going to use more material than I need to? I've done the calculations as to how much thermite I need so why am I going to use more than I need?
There is a good paper by a truther that calculates how much thermite is needed to melt 1Kg of steel but I can't find it atm.
Edit - found it
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JLobdillThermiteChemistryWTC
So my thermite devices have gone off, they are efficient so how much thermite is going to be left over? Answer - next to nothing, it's all reacted to produce heat to melt those pesky columns remember? So there isn't going to be enough to create "pools of molten steel" in the rubble pile anyway.
Right, now those towers are collapsing right. Look at the devastation and the dust. But thermite has a magical property even though it's a powder! That's right, thermite will always stick together in really large amounts. Andrew - do you see a problem with that? Here's an experiment for you. Get some talcum powder, put 100g in an open top container. Find a safe spot say 10m high. Now throw the talc. What happens? That's right it disperses. The talc is no longer concentrated, it's dispersed. Are you seriously telling me that thermite powder is going to remain intact during the violent collapse of the WTC towers?
Lastly how big are these supposed "thermite chips". What do you think they weigh? Grams? Tons?
Now I wish I could find that damn paper that shows how much thermite is required to melt 1Kg of steel but at best, iirc, it's about a 1:1 ratio. So this supposed thermite found in the dust is so little that it wouldn't melt anything. Secondly it certainly wouldn't produce large pools of iron from it's own reaction. Edit - see above
That's why the idea of unreacted thermite reacting to produce large quantities of liquid iron, let alone further melting steel, in the rubble pile is nonsense.
