You're asking the wrong questions by getting too specific, too soon. Don't tell a professional how to do his job. ("Do a spectrograph ...") Tell him the end point that you want, and ask him if he can get you there. In this case, "I want to know if there is thermite in this sample."
There are professionals who look for forensic evidence of thermite. They work at accredited forensic laboratories around the US (& the world), and are called into service if the FBI or a local fire department suspects that arson has occurred using thermite.
The tests that Harrit, et al, conducted are NOT conclusive for thermite. Those tests will tell you the elements, but not the compounds. It is useless to know that there is iron, oxygen & aluminum in some sample, because those elements are so ubiquitous. They occur in countless samples that are not thermite.
You can find analytical laboratories around the country by looking on "thomasnet.com". I'd type in "chemical analysis", then select "services".
Call up a few. Ask to speak directly to the chemists that perform the tests. Not the people that answer the phones. Surprisingly, you can almost always do this.
Ask them if there is any DEFINITIVE, UNQUALIFIED test that they can perform to unquestionably identify thermite in a sample. They will tell you "yes, x-ray diffraction". This test will give you both the elements AND their compounds.
Then look for a lab that does this test (as I said, usually for arson investigation).
How incompetent is it of Harrit, Jones, Ryan et al, to reinvent their own, nondeterministic test, rather than to simply use one that is readily available, done by professionals & cheap?
BTW, Harrit knows about this argument. It was brought to his attention when I posted it in a BBC thread. His basic response: "tfk's right, but clearly he's politically motivated."
Don't trust me, Chris.
Do this yourself. It'll only take about 30 minutes to call 3 independent labs. Deal only with professionals.
tom
Last edited:
