onsdag 21 oktober 2015

nano-thermite advocates have not discussed something which may cast doubt on their whole theory...

Steven Jones and Niels Harrit are very likely the most prominent nano-thermite advocates when it comes to 9/11. They have of course given out the paper in which it was claimed that nano-thermite was found. Others claim it was paint chips...

nano-thermite has been one of the leading theories among truthers. Not everyone has believed in it among the truthers, but seemingly a majority has and still likely do.

Interesting discussion I had with 2 nano-researchers

Yesterday was interesting for me as I was at an institute where I have studied to finish parts of something I studied earlier. This institute is at college- or university-level and certainly has a lot of advanced technology also compared with the rest of the world.

One department deals with nano-technology, like materials and physics at the nano-level. I have not studied that topic though and never been there even though I've passed it many times as it's in the same building as where I was. Not even a teacher I talked to said he was sort of related to them.

I've been curious about this department before, but not gone farther than that. Yesterday though I saw 2 men that maybe looked Pakistani or Indian that seemed to belong to it so I thought I could ask them if they had heard about nano-thermite ever. They had not.

but some of what they told me was very interesting and especially one thing, which perhaps isn't exactly news, but it's not something anyone I have seen have brought up in 9/11-discussions about thermite before(I may have missed it of course).

First, one man I had seen exit the department, told me that if you make something nano-sized, the melting point usually drops, decreases. That's pretty important to keep in mind if we imagine someone wanted something that could withstand fire...

The Second, most important thing, which the first is a part of, is that the other man told me that properties at the nano-level of a material often changes. So, he told me for example that Gold at the nano-scale is not golden in color, but green! He also mentioned some other element or compound that at the nano-level became very strong if you made like a coil or like thin "rope" of it. He also told me about a research project, but I'm not sure I should mention that here.

This 2nd man told me many properties could change at the nano-level like electric conductivity and others mentioned before and more.


My discussion with these 2 men made me think that maybe Steven Jones, Niels Harrit and others don't even know how thermite works at the nano-scale? How can they be certain that thermite which works in one way at the macro-level ("normal" size) will behave the same way at the nano-scale?

I will maybe try to seek out another department more specialized in materials than this one that the 2nd man I talked to recommended me to contact and ask more about this...


Small "disclaimer" here: I know several have claimed that the US military have nano-thermite as used in demolition or at least had, but I have not seen it proven as far as I can remember. I'm not saying that is not true, or that thermite cannot work the same way at the nano-scale, but I'm trying to point out that at least in the 9/11 conspiracy-world the properties of nano-thermite has not been researched at all as far as I know. By that I don't mean dust samples from Ground Zero, but research on known thermite at the nano-level where its properties are tested and documented.

2nd "disclaimer" is that research on this has been done that I'm just not aware of. If so it's my bad, but I thought this was interesting to bring up.

2 kommentarer:

  1. Jimmy, comments on both issues:

    1. Yes, I have seen "melting-point depression" mentioned before. Read the Wikipedia article: It is very much a function of surface-to-volume ratio, and had a significant effect only "as the particle reaches critical diameter, usually < 50 nm for common engineering metals". The effect is smaller for platelets than for spheres. I think that the pigments that you can see in Harrit et al Figure 8 are still too big (grains: ~100 nm; platelet: perhaps ~40 nm thin but ~1000 nm wide). I think the intimate contact with the organic substrate may further inhibit the effect. This notwithstanding, I have seen truthers invoke melting-point depression to explain the lower peak power temperature of ~425 °C compared to, for example, Tillotson's ~525 °C. Which is nonsense - Tillotson's Al-particles were smaller than Harrit's Al-Si-O platelets, and the platy shape does the opposite of help.

    2. Harrit has a background in nanoscience and certainly is aware of the change in physical material properties at the nano-scale. It is to no small degree these, sometimes surprising, property changes that truthers hook onto when they say that nano-thermite can be tailored to have any magic properties they like to imagine. That should not relieve them of the burden to prove each claim individually. On the other hand, it seems that no one in the Harrit team understood pigment properties, until at least after they had published in 2009, for they fail to mention an obvious fact: The red layer is bright red because the iron oxide grains are ~100 nm small. Were they ~250 nm, they'd be darker red, beyond that brownish or dark. Below 100 nm, red iron oxide pigment soon becomes transparent (with a red hue). In general, predominant particle size is one of the main factors determining the color hue of many pigments. Remember that visible light wave length is between 400 and 700 nm - larger than than some dimensions of many pigments! It can't surprise that absorption and reflection of light waves by such small particles is different from that of larger bodies.

    1. Thanks a lot for 2 great replies! Most of that was new to me, even if not all. Much appreciated. I have read some about nano-technology, but not so much really.

      I haven't really studied all the details of the nano-thermite claims and the background of Harrit, but rather have tried to evaluate whether their claims seemed confirmed or not. I do not think so thus far. That does not mean I totally dismiss their findings, but I sort of put it in my "I don't know-box".

      Hence why I didn't know Harrit's background, so thanks for letting me know that.

      I fully agree with you that they need to prove fantastical claims about properties ascribed to nano-thermite.

      I still cannot recall them doing experiments where they verify in known nano-thermite(apparently below 50 nm) the properties it has. After they do that, they could compare to the samples they say they have.

      I knew about light's wavelengths even if I didn't think about it, but I still find it hard to evaluate what that means in terms of light reflected to us, hence my surprise at gold.