I love how you guys talk about nanoenergetics and nanothermite like they don't exist. The point is that NIST considered a very conventional explosive without looking in its own backyard for far more advanced materials.
You suspect that there might theoretically be materials which could be substituted (for an unknown reason) for RDX or other conventional explosives.
But you don't really know how this could be done without causing easily-recorded explosions at the time of collapse, because you have no data on how a nano-energetic explosive might be used in a shaped charge.
You're merely guessing about a hypothetical scenario without any proof that it is even feasible. Congratulations: you're writing a plot for a Hollywood movie, so you're a screenwriter, not a science investigator.
Red, this is science-fiction you're talking about. The only real thing about it are the names of the materials you're weaving into your fictitious narrative.
btw, since NIST calculated only the explosives necessary to take out column 79, it doesn't come close to the explosives required by the Official Truther Hypothesis
The OTH requires that columns along the entire building were simultaneously blown out with high explosives, at the precise moment that the building experienced a 2.25 second period of freefall acceleration.
When you can provide some real-world data on the use of nano-energetics in cutter charges, and demonstrate that a cutter-charge could produce plasma without creating an appreciable explosion (does this qualify as a self-defeating oxymoronic concept?), then you might have something beyond fiction to discuss.
In Hollywood films, a lot of neat and implausible stuff actually happens. Truthers like yourself are operating along the lines of Yuri Geller (allegedly, that is - don't want him to sue me
) - you offer science-fiction, but you try to pass it off as real. Hushaboom explosives are as magical as bending spoons with your mind.
