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

[GlennB]

They can configure super nano-thermite to do pretty much anything.

Incendiary, silent explosive, tooth whitener (so white!), garden fertiliser, wood preservative.....

Don't underestimate the power of They

 

[thedopefishlives]

They can configure super nano-thermite to do pretty much anything.

Incendiary, silent explosive, tooth whitener (so white!), garden fertiliser, wood preservative.....

Don't underestimate the power of They

Well, it had to make a hell of a spray-on steel primer paint, otherwise They (tm) wouldn't have used it as such.

 

[Justin39640]

Originally Posted by Senenmut
im guessing a different type of thermitic device if you haven't been keeping up

Or the acid attack that it looks like.

See, razor sharp... must have been thermite.

 

[beachnut]

im guessing a different type of thermitic device if you haven't been keeping up

Yes, it is a fantasy one. One you can't explain. 12 years, where is the Pulitzer?

I looked up the spectrum in the Jones paper, it does look like stuff you find in clay. You can do that with wiki, imagine what a real study would do? Wait, we have Millette's study.

911 debunked by evidence.

 

[Georgio]

Four posts recently appeared in Debunking the Debunkers relating to the WTC dust n me n Dave Thomas etc.:

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/chris-mohr-matching-dsc-peaks.html

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/mohr-rj-lee-part-2.html

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/mohr-misunderstanding-rj-lee-did-not.html

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/csicops-dave-thomas-thermodynamic-size.html

I read these and there's a lot about the difference between iron spheres and iron-oxide spheres.

Is it possible to obtain PURE IRON spheres by any other process than the thermite reaction?

 

[thedopefishlives]

I read these and there's a lot about the difference between iron spheres and iron-oxide spheres.

Is it possible to obtain PURE IRON spheres by any other process than the thermite reaction?

The spheres in the Harrit et al. paper are not PURE IRON. Nice try, though.

 

[Georgio]

The spheres in the Harrit et al. paper are not PURE IRON. Nice try, though.

I'll rephrase the question: Is there any way to produce spheres containing pure iron rather than containing iron oxide, other than the thermite reaction? I thought the Harrit spheres contained pure iron.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

I'll rephrase the question: Is there any way to produce spheres containing pure iron rather than containing iron oxide, other than the thermite reaction? I thought the Harrit spheres contained pure iron.

You're asking the wrong question.

The thermite reaction produces spheres containing both iron and oxygen, indicating the presence of iron oxides (possibly some pure iron too).

Here's commercial thermite, from this page:

See how the Oxygen (O) actually comes in much higher than iron (Fe)?


Here's supposed WTC thermite:

Notice the O is still way up there?

Your question is based on a false premise, and as such can't be answered.

Now, if you'd like to check out iron spheres produced by simply burning painted steel beams, check out this thread. You'll be surprised to see that the mundane, prosaic fire-produced spheres have more iron content than supposed "thermitic" spheres, either from commercial thermite, or from Harrit's fantasyWTC thermite.

Your Balloon. Popped. Now deal with it.

 

[pgimeno]

Here's commercial thermite, from this page:

[qimg]http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/docs/xeds_commercial.png[/qimg]

That can't be accurate. That graph is fig. 24 from the ATM paper. Yet commercial thermite is used to weld railways, for example, and railways require pure iron, without the silicon/aluminium/oxygen/potassium/calcium/sodium/magnesium/etc. So I have to doubt the accuracy of that figure.

The ATM authors have been caught cherry-picking results that match their preconceptions. I wouldn't be surprised if this was yet another instance.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

That can't be accurate. That graph is fig. 24 from the ATM paper. Yet commercial thermite is used to weld railways, for example, and railways require pure iron, without the silicon/aluminium/oxygen/potassium/calcium/sodium/magnesium/etc. So I have to doubt the accuracy of that figure.

The ATM authors have been caught cherry-picking results that match their preconceptions. I wouldn't be surprised if this was yet another instance.

Thanks for noting this, pgimeno, I'll check it out!

 

[chrismohr]

I'll rephrase the question: Is there any way to produce spheres containing pure iron rather than containing iron oxide, other than the thermite reaction? I thought the Harrit spheres contained pure iron.

Georgio, I'm glad you asked that question because I didn't know the answer either. Here is the standard answer from WikiAnswers of your question, How could you get iron from iron oxide? : "Iron oxide is oxidized iron, that was probably obvious but yeah. The iron went through oxidization to become Iron oxide, so it needs to go through reduction to extract the iron again, which is the opposite chemical reaction to oxidization. DIY method: (Oh yeah, DO THIS OUTSIDE). Get some sawdust, some sand, a metal trash can or a basin type thing (or anything heat resistant that won't react; unglazed ceramic does well). Make a ring of sand on the ground, and line the basin up so that the rim is all immersed in sand, this is to ensure that the reduction chamber is air-tight. Then make a birdsnest of sawdust inside the ring of sand. If your iron oxide is in a powder form or small chunks, you may want to put it on a fireproof, nonreactive plate of some kind. Put the Iron oxide in the saw dust and light the saw dust on fire. Quickly throw another handful or so of sawdust on top and, again quickly, put the basin over the ring of sand. If necessary (it most likely will be), put more sand around the outside and hold down (use heat resistant gloves for this). Wait until the fire has burned out and has cooled down somewhat, then remove the trashcan/basin/chamber. You should have, aside from a lot of burnt up sawdust, some iron metal." Another WikiAnswers question: Iron can be made from iron oxide by heating the iron oxide with? "A reducing agent like Hydrogen(H2), Carbon(C), Carbon monoxide(CO) or Ammonia(NH3)."

Note that thermite is not mentioned as the means of getting iron from iron oxide. Now these answers don't talk about iron-rich microspheres, but those can be created, as RJ Lee said, when the iron oxide flakes off in a high wind (which can be created in a strong fire) and form the naturally efficiently-designed spheres.

 

[Miragememories]

IRON vs IRON OXIDE

I'll rephrase the question:

Is there any way to produce spheres containing pure iron rather than containing iron oxide, other than the thermite reaction?

I thought the Harrit spheres contained pure iron.

"Georgio, I'm glad you asked that question because I didn't know the answer either.

Here is the standard answer from WikiAnswers of your question, "How could you get iron from iron oxide?" :

"Iron oxide is oxidized iron, that was probably obvious but yeah."

Unlike elemental iron, Iron oxide is a combination of iron and oxygen.

To create iron oxide, requires the process of oxidation.

In this process, oxygen is attracted to any exposed elemental iron.

To separate elemental iron from iron oxide, requires the process of reduction.

In this process, oxygen is expelled from iron oxide.

As we are all aware, thermite reactions produce molten elemental iron.

When air borne the molten iron forms a spheroid shape.

Blast furnaces produces metallic spheroids as well.

Iron oxide spheroids.

"The iron went through oxidization to become Iron oxide, so it needs to go through reduction to extract the iron again, which is the opposite chemical reaction to oxidization...

Now these answers don't talk about iron-rich microspheres, but those can be created, as RJ Lee said, when the iron oxide flakes off in a high wind (which can be created in a strong fire) and form the naturally efficiently-designed spheres."

I agree Chris, what RJ Lee describes, is iron oxide ("the iron oxide flakes") subjected to a blast furnace like fire.

A fire believed at times, to be hot enough to melt iron oxide.

"These spheres are the same as iron and alumino‐silicate spheres in the well‐studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces."

RJ Lee said the spheres were a match for those found in the fly ash formed from coal contaminants in furnaces.

This is the kind of iron found in the residue of blast furnaces;

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236106001906
Re: When iron-rich means iron oxide.
"The majority of the iron-rich spheres had two components: iron oxide and amorphous alumino-silicate.

Both materials were apparent on the particle surface, and cross-sections clearly showed that the iron oxide and alumino-silicate were mixed throughout the fly ash particles."

What RJ Lee saw no reason to make clearer, was that these were 'iron-oxide-rich spheres'.

The 2009 Bentham paper reported iron-rich spheres.

MM

 

[pgimeno]

Iron-rich does not mean "rich in pure iron".

It means "rich in the iron element" but not necessarily uncombined.

http://www.google.com/search?q=iron-rich
http://www.google.com/search?q=iron-rich+-food

For example, from this hit (first hit of the second search which excludes the word "food"):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron-rich_sedimentary_rocks

Iron-rich sedimentary rocks are sedimentary rocks which contain 15% or more iron. [...] The main iron ores are from the oxide group consisting of hematite, goethite, and magnetite.
​

They are not called iron-oxide-rich. They are called iron-rich.

The ATM authors don't prove the iron is in elemental form in their spheres.

About figure 21, they say:

In the case of this iron-rich spheroid, the iron content exceeds the oxygen content by approximately a factor of two, so substantial elemental iron must be present.
​

However, they also previously said about the same figure:

Using back-scattered electron (BSE) imaging, spheres were selected in the post-DSC residue which appeared to be rich in iron. An example is shown in Fig. (21) along with the corresponding XEDS spectrum for this sphere.
​

So, it was a selected example. Was it representative? Judging by figures 25 and 26 it wasn't. Those figure have enough oxygen as to account for all the iron, as well as other elements with which the iron could be combined. That's not a proof of elemental iron.

What did that sphere in figure 21 come from, then? Judging by Ivan's experiment using rusted paint, in which microspheres were formed that looked remarkably similar to those in the ATM paper, it could well have come from the gray layer (which Millette associates with rusted steel), as that would explain that spectrum. Or be some sort of contamination. The very same figure 21 clearly shows iron oxide crystals and kaolin platelets, as Sunstealer has repeatedly shown and no one has contended, so it's extremely unlikely that it comes from a reduction of the iron oxide particles because they're still there.

 

[chrismohr]

PGIMENO, From my WikiAnswers etc I get the impression that iron oxide reduction is no big deal in fires. The WikiAnswer in my post above shows how to do it. In addition, Dave Thomas's spheres in his recent experiment were iron-rich, he says richer than Basile's based on how strong the iron reading was on the spectrum. I wonder (and I definitely don't know) if in a regular fire, SOME iron oxide remains as iron oxide and SOME iron oxide reduces to iron?

MM we don't agree. I said that RJ Lee is talking about 9/11 WTC fires where iron oxide flaked off, then was hit with fire and blast-furnace-like winds to create iron-rich spheres with a reduction of the iron oxide to iron. Or at least some of the iron.

Main point: Iron oxide reduction to iron is no big deal, it can happen in a regular fire.

 

[chrismohr]

Hey gang, can anyone tell me what RJ Lee actually said in his original long WTC dust report about iron-rich spheres? I know he said they were to be expected in a fire this big. Did he ID them as iron-rich as distinguished from iron-oxide spheres (I'm pretty sure he did)? What was the question that was asked of RJ Lee (by Dave Thomas or whoever asked the question) that he was responding to in his email? MM (and Ziggi in his blog) is claiming RJ Lee in that email is talking about plain old iron oxide spheres, not iron-rich ones. This I find hard to believe at first glance, but IU may be wrong. I have little time to research this now, but I will soon. Part of that research will be asking y'all right here.

 

[thedopefishlives]

Hey gang, can anyone tell me what RJ Lee actually said in his original long WTC dust report about iron-rich spheres? I know he said they were to be expected in a fire this big. Did he ID them as iron-rich as distinguished from iron-oxide spheres (I'm pretty sure he did)? What was the question that was asked of RJ Lee (by Dave Thomas or whoever asked the question) that he was responding to in his email? MM (and Ziggi in his blog) is claiming RJ Lee in that email is talking about plain old iron oxide spheres, not iron-rich ones. This I find hard to believe at first glance, but IU may be wrong. I have little time to research this now, but I will soon. Part of that research will be asking y'all right here.

Chris, part of the problem is that "iron-rich" is a loaded term. The Truthers seem to think that this indicates "high purity of iron", when in reality, it means "high iron content (though not necessarily elemental iron)". Iron oxide spheres are, by the latter definition, "iron-rich", but by the former definition, they are not.

 

[DaveThomasNMSR]

EDX does NOT ID Compounds!

Hey gang, can anyone tell me what RJ Lee actually said in his original long WTC dust report about iron-rich spheres? I know he said they were to be expected in a fire this big. Did he ID them as iron-rich as distinguished from iron-oxide spheres (I'm pretty sure he did)? What was the question that was asked of RJ Lee (by Dave Thomas or whoever asked the question) that he was responding to in his email? MM (and Ziggi in his blog) is claiming RJ Lee in that email is talking about plain old iron oxide spheres, not iron-rich ones. This I find hard to believe at first glance, but IU may be wrong. I have little time to research this now, but I will soon. Part of that research will be asking y'all right here.

Cool as it is, EDX does not identify compounds!

Analyzing trace contamination
Analyzing traces of contamination is a major infrared spectrometry application. A typical example is the identification of trace contaminants in injectable drugs. These drugs are typically purified using Nuclepore filters. In the past, particles retained on the filter were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy. This method only identifies elements so it is useless for identifying organic or molecular compounds. Infrared spectrometry, on the other hand, is able to extract many details of the molecular structure and dynamics that make it ideally suited for identifying organic and molecular compounds.

More info on EDX here.

 

[chrismohr]

Dave, I know EDX identifies elements, not compounds. But EDX at least shows a bigger spike for "iron-rich" spheres than plain old iron oxide spheres. I'm looking at the RJ Lee Report, and indeed the EDX spectra show iron-rich spheres as RJ Lee reported in the WTC dust. He also explains that “Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension…”
“In addition to the vesicular carbon components, the high heat exposure of the WTC
Dust has also created other morphologically specific varieties of particulate matter including spherical metallic, vesicular siliceous and spherical fly ash components. These types of particles are classic examples of high temperature or combustion by-products and are generally absent in typical office dust…”
“Particles of materials that had been modified by exposure to high temperature, such
as spherical particles of iron and silicates, are common in WTC Dust because of the fire that accompanied the WTC Event, but are not common in “normal” interior office dust…”

RJ Lee actually talks about fly-ash components being created in the WTC fire if I understand him correectly. What is undebatable, however, is that RJ lee clearly states that these iron-rich spheres were created "in WTC Dust because of the fire." There can be no doubt of RJ Lee's meaning here; in fact, The Journal of 9/11 Studies itself shows a clear understanding of RJ Lee's assertion when they write, "we do not agree that this abundance is necessarily due to the “fire that accompanied the WTC Event”."

Now, I know there are many definitions of "iron-rich" in everything from sedimentary rock to vitamins, but to keep our focus, let's stay with RJ Lee's usage of the term in his WTC Dust Report. An EDX reading of iron-rich spheres shows a higher spike for iron than plain old iron oxide spheres. That spike is visible in RJ Lee's spheres, Harrit et al's spheres, Basile's spheres, and Dave Thomas's spheres. RJ Lee in his report has said these spheres are because of the WTC fires. 9/11 Studies people understand this clearly and disagree with his conclusion.

So the next stage of this is to look carefully at what RJ Lee said in his email. When I have time.

 

[alienentity]

Forgive me for butting in, but isn't there general agreement that:

iron reduction does not require therm*te
formation of iron-rich spheres of various species does not require therm*te
formation of such spheres is not proof of temperatures reaching or exceeding the melting point of bulk iron

The main arguments of conspiracy theorists are that these objects could not have been produced by any other process but a thermitic reaction. They have not proven this claim, to my knowledge.

 

[ozeco41]

Forgive me for butting in, but isn't there general agreement that:

iron reduction does not require therm*te
formation of iron-rich spheres of various species does not require therm*te
formation of such spheres is not proof of temperatures reaching or exceeding the melting point of bulk iron

The main arguments of conspiracy theorists are that these objects could not have been produced by any other process but a thermitic reaction. They have not proven this claim, to my knowledge.

Yes to all.