Oystein,
The two things that Basile is talking about doing that I find "interesting" are 1) Actually releasing any FTIR data he collects and 2) heating up his "chips of interest" in a non-oxygenated environment. Those are two pieces of data that have so far not been created (oops, I mean not released to the public) by someone in 9/11 Truth. And both of these can shed some new light on the chips. You're right, the DSC data from burning in in air will be a useless repetition and tell us nothing new.
Chris,
I questioned why they are doing DSC, as
they don't use the DSC data to advance their hypothesis.
Your point 2) talks about "heating up chips", but DSC is not just "heating up chips", it is "heating up chips
plus collecting thermodynamics data along the way".
But they don't use the data.
So why do they demand that Millette, or Basile, or anyone, do DSC?
They kinda
pretend they use the data, for example when they claim that the chips "ignite" near 415 °C - but even with such a simple statement, there are two problems already:
1. two of the chips (the black and green curve) don't "ignite" (i.e. start to oxidize) near 415 °C, they ignite much earlier
2. this ignition temperature is neither typical nor characteristic for thermitic materials. It tells you next to nothing if you want to "prove" nanothermite
Next they
pretend to compare their DSC-curves with that of real nanothermite, and again, this raises a few questions without answering one:
1. By what criteria would they do a comparison of curves, anyway?
2. The curves are not similar in any meaningful way
And then they pretend that the high total energy release sort of speaks for their theory, as in "releases more energy than conventional explosives", but again, that "use" of the data is highly misleading:
1. The chips aren't explosive, so why compare with explosives anyway?
2. The high energy output is their biggest problem really, as it is not possible to construct a "thermitic"material with such high outputs; even if you allow for an "energetic" organic component.
My argument here (last point) is a bit complicated, but the short version is:
- An organic material can release this much energy without embedded oxidizer, but then it reacts on its surface only with available oxygen from air, and that would not deserve the label "thermitic" or "highly energetic"
- If on the other you mix any organic material with an appropriate amount of any solid oxidizing agent, it would be highly reactive and could potentially tailored into a powerful explosive or fast-reacting incendiary (that's what some rocket propellants are made of), but it can be shown that the resulting composite material (organics+oxidizer) will have an energy density lower than what Harrit's DSC data showed.
- Conclusion: The organic matrix can't be a pyrotechnic material as they suggest
Their entire "DSC" argument rests on the supposed residue - the supposedly "molten" iron dropplets that cooled to become spheres. To get this residue, you don't need to do a DSC-Test, you can have that cheaper by just igniting the chip any way you like.
There can of course be value to a DSC Test in the frame of Basile's test proposel, IF he manages to have the very same chip subjected both to methods that unequivocally ID every component, AND reacts the way they want it to react. But that isn't easy: You can't isolate all components without releasing or freeing the enclosed particles/pigments; you have to "destroy" the material to get at them. But then you can't sensibly ignite the thing.
UNLESS you have a chip large enough to cut it into two or more pieces that are in turn large enough to yield good results with the various methods. Then you could run the ID-Tests (FTIR...) on one half, and thermal tests (DSC...) on the other.
Ideally, there'd be one chip that
- Contains Al only as silicate
- Fe only as oxide
- mundane organic matrix without further additives
- gray layer only the usual iron oxide stuff with only traces of C, Mn
AND
- shows a nice exotherm in DSC similar to Fig 19 in Harrut e.al.
AND
- has spherical, iron-bearing particles in the residue
AND
- Basile can't find Al-oxide
Then that would prove that mundane paint can react and form those spheres, without any thermitic reaction at all.
I am doubtful that Basile has his experiment design down to be able to get this sort of result, and anything short of it will be spun by truthers into oblivion.
Oh, and actually, even if he gets the full result as I describe above, they'll still find ways to talk their way out of the total defeat!
