WTC Dust Study Feb 29, 2012 by Dr. James Millette

[jtl]

Still waiting for enlightenment from Jtl as to the purpose of silicon compounds in Harrit's putative thermite chips

By the way Oystein, I don´t know if you suffer from the same level of extreme ignorance as your buddy, but if you don´t you could spend your time doing something useful like educating your buddy about some very basic things.

 

[beachnut]

911 truth fed up, Does this mean the Big Lie of Thermite is done?

...
It is a real pity Millette was not able to do this. I will keep an eye on this forum in case someone actually does experiments or publishes, but I am fed up with the BS gossip on this forum.

Already published - but you don't do the Internet, you are publishing peer reviewed stuff proving 911 was an inside job; where is your work?

http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911.htm
It is funny, no one else can find the thermite in dust.
The USGS, no thermite.
RJ Lee, no thermite.
Only a few fringe nuts in 911 truth can find thermite, Jones, Harrit and some more paranoid nuts. Now that is BS gossip, finding thermite in dust when there was no damage to any WTC steel.

Millette found no thermite. No thermite damage on any WTC steel. You support fraud, and think reality is BS. Your fantasy of thermite is safe inside your head. Don't read the Harrit paper for comprehension, just read the conclusion of thermite.

 

[ozeco41]

Thermite in Dust was simply a "marketing ploy" by Jones. He was losing prominence in the 9/11 debate to Gage and others who were getting more attention than him.

So he "launched a new product" onto the market. Got him some "sales" so he tried the marketing trick again and "rebranded the product" as "nano-thermXte". And got another brief boost in "sales".

Jones seems to have realised that marketing tricks won't work again - we haven't seen "Three for the price of Two" or any other of the desperation ploys.

Bottom line for reality is that the only relevance of thermXte to 9/11 is if it was used in demolition. Since there was no demolition it obviously wasn't used in demolition.

And the truther logic is arse backwards. they try to imply "since there was thermXte therefore there was demolition - with the demolition unproven but riding in on thermXte and not needing proof.

Utter nonsense.

First prove demolition THEN there may be a possibility of showing thermXte was used.

Until then it matters not if there was 100 tonne stockpiles of thermXte in each WTC building. There was no CD therefore thermXte wasn't used for demolition.

And consequently all talk of thermxte is either trolling or counter trolling.

 

[Senenmut]

By the way Oystein, I don´t know if you suffer from the same level of extreme ignorance as your buddy, but if you don´t you could spend your time doing something useful like educating your buddy about some very basic things.

this is interesting about silicon:

"During the past few years, a significant research effort has been made in the formation of reactive nanometer size powders (nanopowders), including reactive elements, such as aluminum, boron, nickel, and silicon. These powders are characterized by very high specific surface area (20 - 150 m2/g). The average particle size of such powders is below 100 nm"

http://www.wtc7.net/cache/sdsmt_projectdescr.htm


also:

"Nano-sized metal particles, including both elemental and oxidized metals, have received significant interest due to their biotoxicity and presence in a wide range of industrial systems. A novel silica technology has been recently explored to minimize the biotoxicity of metal particles by encapsulating them with an amorphous silica shell. In this study, a method to determine silica coating efficiency on metal particles was developed."

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039914011007557



something had to create those silicon rich microspheres found on jones' reacted chips. it sure was NOT kaolin.


silicon can be used in thermitic reactions:
http://www.amazingrust.com/Experiments/how_to/Thermite.html#SiO2

 

[beachnut]

... silicon can be used in thermitic reactions:
http://www.amazingrust.com/Experiments/how_to/Thermite.html#SiO2

lol, google your way to support the dumbest claims on 911. Thermite is a fantasy made up my Jones.

Now you add sand to your thermite to make it? Dumber? Cooler? More sandy? Hotter? Better to hide in your idiotic inside job fantasy pile of fantasy evidence?

The thermite tent of 911 truth is as bad as the beam weapon camp, or nukes, or silent explosives which leave no blast effects.

Now we have silicon added, which kids do to make a thermite mess, anyone can do it, but since it is possible, 911 truth followers have to add the silicon to the their failed fantasy because Si shows up in the dust?

Goes to show, no matter how much evidence against the silly thermite fantasy, like Millette's study, 911 truth gish gallops on, to dumber stuff to seal the deal on 11 years of failure spreading nut-case claims of thermite.

Yes, anyone can google sand can be used as the metal, so you add it to your failed fantasy. Good job; fooled by Jones and presenting evidence you were fooled.

 

[LSSBB]

Does the silicon make the demolition explosives silent and invisible? Anything else doesn't make a jot of difference to match the observables.

 

[Redwood]

Not so much. Thermites are actually hard to get going. The "nano" makes it easier but still not a casual thing. The funny part is even Jones has backed off this "paint" could take down the towers. It was now just a "fuse" for the high explosives.

The Mythbusters guys love playing around with thermite. They use a pile of match heads for initiation. They love to play with match heads, too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvlJ6Qq1PDY

 

[ozeco41]

Does the silicon make the demolition explosives silent and invisible? Anything else doesn't make a jot of difference to match the observables.

No. It is a silly con.

 

[Redwood]

Still waiting for enlightenment from Jtl as to the purpose of silicon compounds in Harrit's putative thermite chips

By the way Oystein, I don´t know if you suffer from the same level of extreme ignorance as your buddy, but if you don´t you could spend your time doing something useful like educating your buddy about some very basic things.

We all sit in Darkness here, O Great One. Enlighten us, we beseech thee. Third time: What is the purpose of silicon (or silicon compounds) in Harrit's putative thermite? Why is it found in the same proportions as aluminum? How does it react with MEK?

 

[jtl]

Senenmut: A novel silica technology has been recently explored to minimize the biotoxicity of metal particles by encapsulating them with an amorphous silica shell.

Learning about this stuff was one of the most interesting things about going to Harrit´s lecture, because before I went I made fun of this idea in his paper that the aluminum is coated. But he explained that the problem with using nano aluminum is that it very quickly looses a big part of its mass to inert al-oxide. The solution is the coating which prevents the aluminum from oxidizing. According to Harrit this is the reason why the chips could remain active for such a long time. Harrit´s paper probably has links to some papers about this, but I don´t have access to all of them so I don´t know for sure. Henry the French researcher has a link to a paper about this very subject: http://www.darksideofgravity.com/Aging.pdf

Good luck with your research, but this forum is no place for it

something had to create those silicon rich microspheres found on jones' reacted chips. it sure was NOT kaolin.

Good point, we need to see some more experiments for all those spheres, but again this forum is not the place to expect that sort of thing. The trolling is out of control these days, nothing but childish BS.

 

[Redwood]

No The funny part is even Jones has backed off this "paint" could take down the towers. It was now just a "fuse" for the high explosives.

Naturally he's back to square one where he invented the "thermite theory" to explain the lack of noise. "Truthers" haven't noticed this yet.

Even funnier, as Harrit has previously said there were "tons, hundreds of tons" in the Towers. Nanothermite as a primary explosive, as in a blasting cap, is even more absurd than nanothermite as a main explosive charge. Blasting cap explosives are very twitchy. They can go off in your hand. When I was a kid, they used to warn us about not picking up any blasting caps that might be left around road-building or quarrying sites.

 

[Redwood]

Learning about this stuff was one of the most interesting things about going to Harrit´s lecture, because before I went I made fun of this idea in his paper that the aluminum is coated. But he explained that the problem with using nano aluminum is that it very quickly looses a big part of its mass to inert al-oxide. The solution is the coating which prevents the aluminum from oxidizing. According to Harrit this is the reason why the chips could remain active for such a long time.

So they coat the aluminum with inert silica, at a 1:1 ratio with the aluminum, to prevent a 5nm coating of aluminum oxide from forming on the aluminum?

No wonder Harrit's energy outputs are so low, with well over 50% inert material! How low, we'll know just as soon as he runs some DSC tests under an inert atmosphere, to prevent the combustion of the organic resin, which is providing most, if not all, of the energy! (It's really "all" )

How exactly does the silica-coated aluminum then react with the Fe₂O₃? If it were up to me, I'd just use aluminum spheres in the 250nm-1,000 nm range (pretty darn fine granulation) and pay the price of a 5nm oxide coating forming on them. Or even 250nm-1000nm thick platelets. But I'm only a dumb retired industrial chemist.

We're dying to learn how MEK separates the silica from the aluminum, also.

Enlighten us, O Great One.

 

[beachnut]

Is this another case of spreading? Do 911 truth followers read their sources?

...
silicon can be used in thermitic reactions:
http://www.amazingrust.com/Experiments/how_to/Thermite.html#SiO2

Oh, but our Harrit believer, meant a coating, to keep the Al from being oxides in a few hours; extending it's life to a hundreds of hours. But he has not got the gish gallop on how long they stuff last. Will have to check with the head gish gallop nut, Harrit to get the low down, the next piece of knowledge form the gurus of woo, the thermite nuts, Harrit-n-Jones.

... IGNORANCE is prevalent on this forum after almost 4 years of arguing about Harrit´s paper. Do none of you know what the purpose of covering the aluminum with a silicon based coating would be?

See Senenmut, it is a coating a silicon based coating made up of ....
C Carbon 12.01078 9 54.5140 %
H Hydrogen 1.007947 14 7.1164 %
O Oxygen 15.99943 3 24.2059 %
Si Silicon 28.08553 1 14.1637 %
Yep, 14 percent Silicon, applied to the super-nano-thermite at 5 percent, making the final Silicon, small.
It looks more like a carbon based coating, but the silicon is important, it is part of the organic compound, and it is a coating, but you missed the call.
OR...
We have another organic compound to coat, with no Si? No Si? Which is better, and which one will Harrit use in his fantasy world of woo, thermite?
Oleic acid can be used... No Si.
C Carbon 12.01078 17 75.7794 %
H Hydrogen 1.007947 33 12.3448 %
O Oxygen 15.99943 2 11.8759 %

Which give faster reaction? Anyone? Harrit, which one did you use?

Learning about this stuff was one of the most interesting things about going to Harrit´s lecture, because before I went I made fun of this idea in his paper that the aluminum is coated. But he explained that the problem with using nano aluminum is that it very quickly looses a big part of its mass to inert al-oxide. The solution is the coating which prevents the aluminum from oxidizing. According to Harrit this is the reason why the chips could remain active for such a long time. Harrit´s paper probably has links to some papers about this, but I don´t have access to all of them so I don´t know for sure. Henry the French researcher has a link to a paper about this very subject: http://www.darksideofgravity.com/Aging.pdf

Good luck with your research, but this forum is no place for it:


Good point, we need to see some more experiments for all those spheres, but again this forum is not the place to expect that sort of thing.

Put a number to it. How long does their fantasy thermite last? Why did they fail to identify the coating by chemical composition? How did it last all those years? lol, you sure are gullible?

When will you read what you post? You posted proof Harrit is fooling you. How long did it take you to google this stuff?


Harrit fooled you. They show you iron oxide as the product of the dust burning, and you believe they had thermite.

It is funny, the faster propagation time is with CH3(CH2)7CH=CH(CH2)7COOH. No silicon. Guess they used the Dow coating, applied at 5 percent? Is that what you are saying?

Then you say they found silicon, due to a coating, where as the silicon was not a coating in the real world for the fantasy thermite.
Then we have the silicon stuff, made by Dow, C9H14O3Si, 5 percent by weight coating to make the Al last hundreds of hours. But they did not find the coating? Did they do the wrong test? Did they find Dow Corning® Z-6124 Silane? Are they the experts they claim to be, but they failed to find Dow Corning® Z-6124 Silane in the dust? LOL, you fall for the old gish gallop failed paranoid conspiracy theorists BS nonsense?

When was the fantasy thermite placed in your inside job? How many hours? What is the shelf life of your fantasy thermite and how was it fused? lol, it gets better and better, as we now have to include thousands of people to make, plan, and plant the fantasy thermite to murder 3,000 people. Good job, be all you can be, gullible 911 truth follower.

5 percent by weight? Does this make sense on your fantasy thermite paper?

You bring fantasy claims. You believe in fantasy, and you have no idea what DSC is.

Which coating did they use? 11 years of failure, and the big clue on this thermite nonsense; no damage by thermite to any steel at the WTC. The best minds, the smartest minds in 911 truth have left 911 truth and joined reality; can Jones and Harrit make the transition back to the real world?

Senenmut: A novel silica technology has been recently explored to minimize the biotoxicity of metal particles by encapsulating them with an amorphous silica shell. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039914011007557#gr1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21962698

Learning about this stuff was one of the most interesting things about going to Harrit´s lecture, because before I went I made fun of this idea in his paper that the aluminum is coated.... BS. http://www.darksideofgravity.com/Aging.pdf

Which method was used, the one Senenmut googled, or your method? Which one is it? Check with the paranoid conspiracy theorists Harrit; which one is in his fantasy?

Do you 911 truth followers ever get together to figure out which gish gallop point you will use? lol, this can't get funnier, can it?

Check with Harrit and explain which method they used to keep their thermite fantasy fresh and tasty. You guys sure eat this stuff up. Which one was used.

Do you guys know what you are doing? lol, it is funny but then I am an engineer, and real far out geeky nonsense is funny.

Do you guys read your the sources you google?

Millete found not thermite. Harrit has a fantasy. How did he fuse his thermite? Radios?

 

[Redwood]

Jtl, it would certainly help, too, if you could show us where in Harrit's paper these silica-coated aluminum nanospheres were characterized. You know, images, data, etc. You don't suppose he left them out? These are the smoking guns! Perhaps you could contact him and ask him to release and other data he's been withholding for four years, now. What do you and he have to lose? Harrit hasn't exactly rocked the world of chemistry with his paper. Maybe it's because he forgot the smoking gun evidence. You know, absent-minded professor and all that.

 

[Redwood]

Amazin' silica coated aluminum!

The more I think about this silica gel coating on the aluminum nanospheres, the more amazin' it gets. It won't admit oxygen molecules, but it will allow the aluminum to react with Fe₂O₃ particles that are larger than oxygen molecules by orders of magnitude!

Maybe it's a really good heat conductor, unlike ordinary silica gels, which are excellent thermal insulators.

The fact that silica gels are hydrophilic would also seem to present problems, but perhaps they've come up with one that's hydrophobic!

This stuff is amazin', I tells ya!

Edited to add: Oh, and it's removable by MEK, too!

 

[alienentity]

Learning about this stuff was one of the most interesting things about going to Harrit´s lecture, because before I went I made fun of this idea in his paper that the aluminum is coated.

Whatever his rationale, how is this material supposed to be thermitic when it contains less than 3% of either Al or Fe? His explanation is moot, but I don't believe he's really trying to solve anything, just to peddle pseudo-scientific conspiracy theories. That's why he continues to avoid the unavoidable.....how many chemists do you think he's fooling? I would guess not many.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Henry the French researcher has a link to a paper about this very subject: http://www.darksideofgravity.com/Aging.pdf

Good luck with your research, but this forum is no place for it

Here's a couple of threads on Frederic Henry-couannier's work:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222025

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164605

The trolling is out of control these days, nothing but childish BS.

I'm inclined to agree

 

[chrismohr]

Hi all,
Just so you know, I've now approached over a dozen chemists asking if they would read the Harrit/Jones et al paper. One guy said he would pass it on to his grad students to see if anyone is interested. Two other chemists said this is pseudoscience and not worth their time. The other 10 or 11 chemists have not responded at all. This is roughly the same kind of response I got when I was offering WTC dust analysis work to labs for money. A couple years ago, when I was trying to ask around about physics questions, I managed to find about 14 physicists/engineers to answer at least some questions, but inevitably I succeeded by cornering them at parties or other gatherings where I could talk to them one on one. First they would need assurance I was not a 9/11 Truth person myself before they would even agree to talk with me. It was harder for them to ignore me that it is when an email inquiry arrives in their mailbox.

 

[Spanx]

Hi all,
Just so you know, I've now approached over a dozen chemists asking if they would read the Harrit/Jones et al paper. One guy said he would pass it on to his grad students to see if anyone is interested. Two other chemists said this is pseudoscience and not worth their time. The other 10 or 11 chemists have not responded at all. This is roughly the same kind of response I got when I was offering WTC dust analysis work to labs for money. A couple years ago, when I was trying to ask around about physics questions, I managed to find about 14 physicists/engineers to answer at least some questions, but inevitably I succeeded by cornering them at parties or other gatherings where I could talk to them one on one. First they would need assurance I was not a 9/11 Truth person myself before they would even agree to talk with me. It was harder for them to ignore me that it is when an email inquiry arrives in their mailbox.

So I guess, now we wait for jtl to come along calling you a liar and demanding the names and addresses of the chemists you have spoken to ?

 

[Miragememories]

"Hi all,
Just so you know, I've now approached over a dozen chemists asking if they would read the Harrit/Jones et al paper. One guy said he would pass it on to his grad students to see if anyone is interested. Two other chemists said this is pseudoscience and not worth their time. The other 10 or 11 chemists have not responded at all. This is roughly the same kind of response I got when I was offering WTC dust analysis work to labs for money. A couple years ago, when I was trying to ask around about physics questions, I managed to find about 14 physicists/engineers to answer at least some questions, but inevitably I succeeded by cornering them at parties or other gatherings where I could talk to them one on one. First they would need assurance I was not a 9/11 Truth person myself before they would even agree to talk with me. It was harder for them to ignore me that it is when an email inquiry arrives in their mailbox."

And how would you 'weigh' the importance of what a given chemist has to say?

Should the chemist have read the 2009 Bentham Paper by Dr. Harrit et al?

Is there no importance behind the chemists, those who have read the paper, speaking for A&E911Truth?

Particularly in the security-obsessive times we live in, very few of thousands and thousands of 'rank 'n file' chemists are going to seek unpopular attention.

They know the truth comes with a high pricetag.

It isn't called the 'status quo' for nothing.

So you've 'approached and asked' over 12 chemists if they would read the 2009 Bentham Paper by Dr. Harrit et al.

10-11 chemists gave no response
1 chemist said he was not interested but his students were welcome.
2 chemists had previously made up their minds and were not interested in further response.

None of the 12-13 chemists did what you asked.

None of the 12-13 chemists acknowledged having read the 2009 Bentham Paper by Harrit et al?

So moving on, you opine that you got similar responses from "about 14 physicists/engineers".

A group that firstly required you did not disagree with their point of view.

MM