The 9/11 Forum

Hi everyone!

Good to see some familiar names here already!

I would like to start a thread on Steven Jones' "iron-rich microspheres" and "red chips",....... I am sure we are all familiar with them.

Jones claims that the microspheres he collected from the WTC dust could only be formed by thermite reactions, and the red chips are unreacted thermite.

I think this would be an interesting and worthwhile topic to debate.

To get the ball rolling I would like to discuss the fact that Jones' particles were magnetically separated and are therefore (obviously!) magnetic.

Now my question is: Why would red thermite "chips" be magnetic?

Is this a clue to the possibility that the red chips are NOT thermite?

An additional question for proponents of Jones' thermite theory would be: why is there a significant amount of silicon in WTC magnetic microspheres and red chips?

For, as I said, let us focus on the magnetism of Jones' "iron-rich" dust sample.

Si is not normally considered to be an ingredient of thermite which is mostly finely divided iron oxide and aluminum metal; typically with small amounts of accelerants and oxygen-rich promoters. Thus a typical "thermite" reaction would be:

Fe2O3 + 2Al = Al2O3 + 2Fe

Which would be "initiated" and "promoted", i.e. helped along, by Mg, CuO, MnO2, etc.

So why is Si found in Jones' "iron-rich microspheres" and in his "unreacted thermite chips"?

Well here is something to think about: Si is an ingredient of the important synthetic material "Sendust powder" which is a "soft" magnetic material consisting of 84% Fe, 10% Si and 6%Al. This magnetic material is widely used in electronic equipment such as cellular phones in the form of plastic composite "noise suppression sheeting" made by companies such as NEC.

Dr. G wrote:An additional question for proponents of Jones' thermite theory would be: why is there a significant amount of silicon in WTC magnetic microspheres and red chips?

For, as I said, let us focus on the magnetism of Jones' "iron-rich" dust sample.

Si is not normally considered to be an ingredient of thermite which is mostly finely divided iron oxide and aluminum metal; typically with small amounts of accelerants and oxygen-rich promoters. Thus a typical "thermite" reaction would be:

Fe2O3 + 2Al = Al2O3 + 2Fe

Which would be "initiated" and "promoted", i.e. helped along, by Mg, CuO, MnO2, etc.

So why is Si found in Jones' "iron-rich microspheres" and in his "unreacted thermite chips"?

Well here is something to think about: Si is an ingredient of the important synthetic material "Sendust powder" which is a "soft" magnetic material consisting of 84% Fe, 10% Si and 6%Al. This magnetic material is widely used in electronic equipment such as cellular phones in the form of plastic composite "noise suppression sheeting" made by companies such as NEC.

Is there any reason why a mixture of Fe and Al, regardless of other impurities, wouldn't be attracted to a magnet? Or do you mean that the material itself has a magnetic field?

Dr. Jones did ignite one of his "red and grey chips" and it burned white hot. Would something like a composite with "Sendust powder" do that?

Hambone wrote:Is there any reason why a mixture of Fe and Al, regardless of other impurities, wouldn't be attracted to a magnet? Or do you mean that the material itself has a magnetic field?

Since thermite is a mixture of iron oxide and aluminium, it would only be expected to be magnetic if the oxide used contains a high proportion of magnetite (Fe3O4). There seems little reason to use magnetite in a thermite formulation rather than hematite (Fe2O3); there are no advantages I can think of, whereas the disadvantages would include greater cost, poorer yield and greater ease of detection of residues (because magnetic separation won't work with hematite, which is non-magnetic). I suspect Dr. G knows more about this than I do, though.

As usual, rational debate is a little difficult, because Steven Jones has limited himself to a bare assertion that the chips are unreacted thermite, and hasn't provided a chain of reasoning.

Dave

Dave Rogers:

Yes, I agree about magnetite in thermite..... It COULD be used, but I believe hematite would be the usual form of iron oxide in most thermites, and it is non-magnetic.

Jones' red chips appear to contain Si, and I have asked him about the presence of Si in a "thermite" formulation. His response was that he analysed some "commercial thermite", (no more details given!), and found Si. I would like to see some XRD data which would tell us how the Si is combined, ...... is it SiO2, Fe2SiO4, Fe2Si, etc.

Hambone:

I have seen the video clip where Jones talks about the ignition of a red chip, but this is not very convincing. If the red chips were from a "sendust" composite sheet (Google on "NEC" and "Flex Suppressor") I believe a fragment would also ignite, if sufficiently heated, since it is made from finely divided Fe-Al-Si particles dispersed in a polymeric binder.

Dr. G wrote:To get the ball rolling I would like to discuss the fact that Jones' particles were magnetically separated and are therefore (obviously!) magnetic.

Can you post some quote from Prof. Jones stating that the thermite chips were in fact magnetically seperated or as least indicate the source for this statement?

Is this a clue to the possibility that the red chips are NOT thermite?

No, Prof. Jones has clearly indicated that EDS analysis of the chips shows they are some-kind of an advanced thermite composite: http://911blogger.com/node/13090#comment-172319

The magnetic properties of these thermite chips are irrelevant.

Dr. G wrote:An additional question for proponents of Jones' thermite theory would be: why is there a significant amount of silicon in WTC magnetic microspheres and red chips?

This is a yet another irrelevant question. Obviously, one can make themite composites with or without silicon based materials.

So why is Si found in Jones' "iron-rich microspheres" and in his "unreacted thermite chips"?

Perhaps the gray-side of the thermite composite contains a glass-like material, maybe silicon is used in the process to generate the ultra-fine particles... at this point in time from a criminal forensic point, it does not matter.

Dave Rogers wrote:There seems little reason to use magnetite in a thermite formulation rather than hematite (Fe2O3); there are no advantages I can think of...

How much experience do you have in materials engineering?

... whereas the disadvantages would include greater cost, poorer yield and greater ease of detection of residues (because magnetic separation won't work with hematite, which is non-magnetic).

Greater cost? Yeah, right... like am I sure that trivial differences in the cost of explosives would be a huge factor in designing advanced super-thermite composites for covert applications like false-flag ops.

Poorer yield? Do you mean explosive yield or processing yield? Either way, what basis do you have for making any such statement? Where is your data on the processing and application of super-thermite composites?

Ease of detection? The idea that one would prioritize a preference for hematite over magnetite on this basis is absurd. Once iron-rich microspheres are found, not to mention the pools of molten metal that even make it into the controlled media, the super-thermite game is up.

As usual, rational debate is a little difficult, because Steven Jones has limited himself to a bare assertion that the chips are unreacted thermite, and hasn't provided a chain of reasoning.

Oh please... save it for JREF.

Moderator suggestion:

Snide comments are not conducive to a constructive discussion. Please focus on the issues not the background of the poster. Repeated comments of this type will be considered a personal attack and a warning will be issued.

/Administrator

bofors wrote:

Dave Rogers wrote:There seems little reason to use magnetite in a thermite formulation rather than hematite (Fe2O3); there are no advantages I can think of...

How much experience do you have in materials engineering?

... whereas the disadvantages would include greater cost, poorer yield and greater ease of detection of residues (because magnetic separation won't work with hematite, which is non-magnetic).

Greater cost? Yeah, right... like am I sure that trivial differences in the cost of explosives would be a huge factor in designing advanced super-thermite composites for covert applications like false-flag ops.

Poorer yield? Do you mean explosive yield or processing yield? Either way, what basis do you have for making any such statement? Where is your data on the processing and application of super-thermite composites?

Ease of detection? The idea that one would prioritize a preference for hematite over magnetite on this basis is absurd. Once iron-rich microspheres are found, not to mention the pools of molten metal that even make it into the controlled media, the super-thermite game is up.

As usual, rational debate is a little difficult, because Steven Jones has limited himself to a bare assertion that the chips are unreacted thermite, and hasn't provided a chain of reasoning.

Oh please... save it for JREF.

Dr. Joneses samples of commercial grade thermite contain silicon dioxide, sandstone contaminants from cheap low grade iron ore, as far as the red chips any blend of aluminum and iron oxide will ignite, it does not prove that the material is thermite, it could be paint or commercial metallic foil, or residue of a surface reaction between the cladding and the steel it was attached to over time.
The more I see from Dr. Jones the more I am convinced he does not understand his own theories well enough to make a valid argument for them.

Sulfur is added to High silicon thermites to increase the effectiveness of the thermite.

http://www.amazingrust.com/Experiments/how_to/Thermite.html

I must also point out that to really test the aluminum Alloy for potential for a spontaneous thermite reaction you need to know the exact concentrations of the metals in that alloy, some aluminum Alloys with high magnesium, Chromium, or titanium contents can undergo aluminum oxidation reactions at lower temperatures.

A test of the actually alloy would be more effective than merely testing random samples of Aluminum, as I understand the alloy or the Cladding, was a high Chromium, high magnesium Blend manufactured by Alcoa Aluminum, I have tried to get the Alloy's specifics but could not Obtain them.

Dr. G wrote:Dave Rogers:

Yes, I agree about magnetite in thermite..... It COULD be used, but I believe hematite would be the usual form of iron oxide in most thermites, and it is non-magnetic.

Jones' red chips appear to contain Si, and I have asked him about the presence of Si in a "thermite" formulation. His response was that he analysed some "commercial thermite", (no more details given!), and found Si. I would like to see some XRD data which would tell us how the Si is combined, ...... is it SiO2, Fe2SiO4, Fe2Si, etc.

Hambone:

I have seen the video clip where Jones talks about the ignition of a red chip, but this is not very convincing. If the red chips were from a "sendust" composite sheet (Google on "NEC" and "Flex Suppressor") I believe a fragment would also ignite, if sufficiently heated, since it is made from finely divided Fe-Al-Si particles dispersed in a polymeric binder.

Commercial thermite, LOL, Commercial thermite uses black magnetic Fe 304 sand, http://periodictable.com/Items/026.5/index.html it can be easily collected and magnetically separated, shifted for size and sold, most comes from European deposits around the Black Sea,
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0066-1546(1981)31%3C137%3AISFTBS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I And other known deposits of magnetite sand some in the USA.

The testing of commercial grade thermite for the red and gray chips show that DR. Jones does not understand the mechanics of his own theories.

For the theories that Dr. Jones proposes, a pure form of iron with aluminum would be necessary or an Aluminum, iron, silicon dioxide, sulfur blend, could be used, with nano thermites with a temperature derived oxidant, nano thermites although not true high explosive are good at generating a hot gas over pressure quickly, if that over pressure is high in oxygen, it can cut a standing column, if the device is properly designed, however it is totally apparent if such a device is used.
Nano thermites are great as gas generators because to successfully provide the gas without destroying the devices you have to reduce the mass of the thermites to the lowest possible volume and have them react as quickly as possible once the metal is heated by the main contact charge placed directly on the metal surface.
Once you know how the device works all you need is a good understanding of gravity and its reactions on molten masses and gases to build one.

There are certian foils that used Iron, Aluminum with a silicon acheasive to aluminize bath room fixtures and hand railings.
I can think of a thousand products in the building that could have produced the chips.

How many potential sources do you want for red Grey chips, all aluminized steel eventually produces them, especially aluminized, over head power line neutrals.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3813481.html

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4889567/claims.html

Ps the chips from overhead wire also ignite if sufficient rusting has taken place do to weathering or exposure to fire. [/url]

bofors wrote:No, Prof. Jones has clearly indicated that EDS analysis of the chips shows they are some-kind of an advanced thermite composite: http://911blogger.com/node/13090#comment-172319

That's not confirmed by the passage you cite. Jones states that "When you get the full talk, you will see that I hypothesize that the red side of the chips represent ultrafine "super-thermite", which as explained in my first paper is explosive, producing a jet of molten iron." Jones is therefore hypothesizing, rather than demonstrating, the nature of the chips.

Dave

bofors wrote:How much experience do you have in materials engineering?

Probably no more or less than, say, someone who's spent the last 20 years in nuclear physics rather than solid state physics. I hope speculation isn't going to be discouraged on this forum, because limiting the discussion to people's professional specialisms would make most threads rather short.

bofors wrote:Poorer yield? Do you mean explosive yield or processing yield? Either way, what basis do you have for making any such statement? Where is your data on the processing and application of super-thermite composites?

I mean poorer energy yield per unit mass, and this seems fairly obvious from the chemistry involved. Whatever the processing and application, the original energy density of the materials cannot be exceeded.

bofors wrote:Ease of detection? The idea that one would prioritize a preference for hematite over magnetite on this basis is absurd. Once iron-rich microspheres are found, not to mention the pools of molten metal that even make it into the controlled media, the super-thermite game is up.

Yet these things have been found, and no prosecutions are in train, nor are members of al-Qaeda being released. Ease of detection is perhaps the most critical aspect to any conspiracy of the type the 9-11 truth movement speculates about, and many of the specific theories suggested appear absurd because of the ease with which they could be detected, if true.

In any case, it appears that my speculation about magnetite vs. hematite in thermite was wrong, so I'm happy to admit that finding magnetite in a thermite formulation would be unexceptional.

I have to say, though, that finding magnetic material adhering to a plastic substrate in microscopic quantities, I would be more inclined to suspect magnetic information storage media as a source, rather than nanocomposite thermite charges designed to sever structural columns a few feet across. The scale of the evidence alone is disproportionate.

bofors wrote:Oh please... save it for JREF.

Again, I hope criticism of the content of Steven Jones's arguments isn't to be overly discouraged here, as that might bias the analysis somewhat.

Dave

Dave Rogers wrote:Again, I hope criticism of the content of Steven Jones's arguments isn't to be overly discouraged here, as that might bias the analysis somewhat.

Dave

I speak only for myself - fire away.

Dave Rogers wrote:Again, I hope criticism of the content of Steven Jones's arguments isn't to be overly discouraged here, as that might bias the analysis somewhat.

Dave

Nothing is holy here. Sincere criticism of all arguments is encouraged.