Or a synthesized nanocrystalline composites in a silica matrix with pores containing the high explosive RDX or PETN. (which is from the same article you are quoting) What might these be used for? Not airbag ignition or welding.
Thought it would be an opportune moment to ask if LLNL replied to your email yet Mick?
It depends which parameters are "improved"Or melting steel?
In what way is it better at cutting thick steel?
But can it be tuned to be significantly better than thermate at cutting thick steel. That's the question.
It is, don't be so hard on yourself.No, really it isn't, as I told you I would let you know if they did. Please try to be honest here. It's not a debate.
And which are? And what effect does it have. That's the question.It depends which parameters are "improved"
It is, don't be so hard on yourself.
So you didn't get an undeliverable message back from it?
Thats your question @Mick West . Casting around to dispute whether a huge investment in the development of nanothermite could produce a superior product to thermite, that can be made locally, at very low cost, is equally pointless - because a moments thought on that would reveal the answer.
I am quite satisfied to use what they had to say on October 2000, here https://www.llnl.gov/str/RSimpson.htmlNo. Feel free to try yourself though.
The question is how much better it would be at cutting thick steel.
You can keep saying it's "better" in a vague general sense. But in what way is it better? And how does that affect the cutting of steel?
I am quite satisfied to use what they had to say on October 2000, here https://www.llnl.gov/str/RSimpson.html
Sorry Gerry. It look like you are trolling now. Why don't you come back in a week?
OK. That does it. Thread now well and truly closed. Another undebunked one to chalk up.
This answers both questions Yes it is tunable but NO it is NOT better for cutting in any of the formulations. It IS however great for welding ."Overall, the material is removed from the wire much slower than was observed for the thermite."
I suspect he was blinded by the prospect of having defeated the infamous Mick West in a debate thus establishing his CT credentials forever!!
Sorry guys but I must have missed @Mick West 's straight answer- or in fact any answer. Could you find it for me and re-print it please.
Are you guessing that? Doesn't sound right to me. I would have guessed that to decrease the amount of Al would slow the exchange rate of the oxygen. ie it wouldn't move the air as quickly. G;ad we agree that this substance can be tuned to do either job though.
Just going by Wikipedia:
thermites is that the oxidizer and a reducing agent, normally iron oxide and aluminium, are in the form of extremely fine powders (nanoparticles). This dramatically increases the reactivity relative to micrometre-sized powder thermite. As the mass transport mechanisms that slow down the burning rates of traditional thermites are not so important at these scales, the reactions becomekinetically controlled and proceed much more quickly.
Of course changing the proportions to get incomplete combustion would work too, you could also have a higher proportion of support matrix.
It seemed though, in the LLNL piece you quoted, the idea was to make it more explosive. You seems to want something much more like normal thermite/thermate. How would you characterize the operative chemical reaction of the "tuned" nanothermite you propose using?
Did you get a reply from Simpson from LLNL yet?
You'd be the first to know if I did.
Surely since AE911 are proposing that nanothermite would cut steel, they would have some rough figures on how much would be needed? Or is it just a hand-waving "better".
Given that regular thermitic material has been proven to be capable of doing this, isn't is safe to say that material made of similar elements, but on a finer scale can also do this?
Only if it does the same thing (supplies heat at a particular location). If it just become more kinetically energetic, then no.
You think gravity can't do that. That doesn't mean it can't.I do know that gravity can't do that though.
I see what you did there. You think the picture gives you the formula. Actually, the material is laid down in extraordinarily thin layers, 10 to 10,000 Angstroms.Incidentally, the photograph of the material shown in that patent description is remarkably similar to Harrit's 'chips'.
Wow, really? That is your idea of an inquiry into the question? Neither of you has been able to address, except in the most vague and unsupported way, HOW nanothermite might be better for cutting thick steel.OK. That does it. Thread now well and truly closed. Another undebunked one to chalk up.
And not a single example of this 'miracle material' being used for cutting steel, in over 13 years !
Wait, what is the criteria for a thermite to be considered "nano"? You can buy 500 mesh (~30 micron) aluminum and iron oxide powders on amazon for super cheap. Anyone want to do some experiments this weekend? Cost you like ~$25 to get the ingredients.
Or melting steel?
In what way is it better at cutting thick steel?
Where is the evidence in the debris that thick steel was cut?
Bolts discussion moved to:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/th...ed-as-part-of-wtc-controlled-demolition.2943/
You really need to reconsider this policy.
There are plenty of other forums with different policies. You may pick which forum you want to post in.
I'm not sure what point of mine you think you rebutted though.
I've already told you that you just have to ask me to leave and it will happen.
And as you have moved my comment to another thread, and deleted a lot of it, then others will not be able to see my rebuttal and decide for themselves will they. That is my point.
I happen to think Mick's approach is a good policy. When I've been visiting JREF lately there hasn't been enough moderation to keep threads on topic. I actually lose interest in those threads for that reason, even though some of the OT discussions are interesting the thread becomes too diluted.I've already told you that you just have to ask me to leave and it will happen.
And as you have moved my comment to another thread, and deleted a lot of it, then others will not be able to see my rebuttal and decide for themselves will they. That is my point.
In fact this particular thread shows how challenging it is to come up with factual support for the assumption that nanothermite is somehow 'better' than thermite for cutting steel.
Its a meaningless thread though. What is the purpose of attempting to compare a substance on which there is hardly any real data due to its closely guarded nature with a substance that I can make at home ?
I just don't agree with that, as Mick points out this is directly relevant to 9/11 truth claims, supported on this thread by Gerry and others.Its a meaningless thread though. What is the purpose of attempting to compare a substance on which there is hardly any real data due to its closely guarded nature with a substance that I can make at home ?
In any case, no sensible commercial operative would try to cut 3" thick steel with common or garden thermite. Never have- never will. So what is the point in trying to discover if a totally different product can do what has never been attempted by another less versatile substance ?
Unless you amend the constraints, to compare the use of thermite in a thermic lance used to cut steel, and instead load the same lance with nanothermite, then the link to cutting may make more sense. But again it would still be a pointless search because a nanothermite lance doesnt exist either.
Source: http://ipsvalencia2013.com/home-h-196-51/SESSION 1 SYNTHESIS
● All aspects of Propellants, Explosives and Pyrotechnics (PEP)
● Fuel/oxidizer formulations
● Synthesis and composition of explosives and other energetic composites
SESSION 2 MANUFACTURE
● All aspects of Propellants, Explosives and Pyrotechnics (PEP)
● R&D, manufacturing processes, lifecycle issues, Disposal and Demil
SESSION 3 SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY ASPECTS
● Contemporary issues for energetic materials: safety, environmental, regulatory, etc.
● Regulations and standards applicable to energetics
SESSION 4 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
● Nanoscale energetic materials
● Reduced Sensitivity Pyrotechnics
● New developments
SESSION 5 MODELLING AND TESTING
● Computational methods applied to energetics
● Testing methods and devices
SESSION 6 INITIATION
● Initiators and initiation
SESSION 7 MILITARY PYROTECHNICS
● Flares
● Obscurants
● Illuminants
● Reactive Fragments
● Heat sources and thermites
● Agent defeat
SESION 8 STAGE PYRO AND FIREWORKS
Why are truthers still claiming that this knowledge is secret? It isn't.
LOL, if you have a license you can order lots of pyrotechnic supplies here in Canada. That's a standard safety requirement in the industry.OK. As you have fully researched this commonly available material please send me a link to where I can buy 25 kilograms of nanothermite. I want to do a few experiments in my back yard.
There's lots of commercially made stuff you can't buy without proper authorization. That doesn't make it secret. I think you're confusing 'secret and classified' with 'not easy to get'. I bet you a good chemist could make some from scratch if they wanted to.