Nano-Thermite wank

[Formless]

Yes, its another 9-11 conspiracy thread. And if you figured that out from just reading the title, congrats! You can probably help me here.

So there is a theorist I know (relation: father) that was, for a long time, content to lay low because he didn't have much he could use to validate his beliefs. Until, that is, some wanker chemist decided to ignore the engineering community and claim he had found evidence that a super-new form of thermite was used to destroy building 7 (of course) and therefor the whole shebang (of course). Said chemical is supposedly real and is supposedly used by the Navy. The catch of course is that its a very cutting edge explosive, thus raising the question of who the fuck wouldn't just use fucking TNT or some other conventional explosive. So for those who know more about this particular piece of horseshit than I, could you tell me:

1) do the claims that this shit is used by the military have any validity? Or is that a lie?

2) could someone fill me in on the evidence the wanker chemist (whose name I forgot, sadly) supposedly found? I vaguely remember it being a load of crap, but whenever I get into this conversation, the reason why inevitably slips my mind.

3) post any other help on this subject that comes to mind ITT.

Note before posting any armchair psychoanalysis of you average Truther that said conspiracy theorist is slightly different from the norm in terms of which agents he thinks are responsible: instead of it being Bush to get into Iraq, he thinks it was the dirty Zionists which fits with his belief that the US has become a puppet for Israel WRT the Middle East (not entirely without justification, but taken to its paranoid extreme). It also fits with a pattern of deceit he believes the US uses whenever they want to start another war: the submarine threat and the sinking of the Lusitania in WWI, Pearl Harbor in WWII, shady diplomatic dickery in the first Gulf war, etc..

[Samuel]

It also fits with a pattern of deceit he believes the US uses whenever they want to start another war: the submarine threat and the sinking of the Lusitania in WWI,

We didn't declare war after Germany sunk the Lusitania. We declared war after Britain gave us the transcript of the Zimmerman telegram.

[Formless]

But submarine attacks were, iirc, one of the pretexts for war.

In any case, that's not really what this thread is supposed to be about, or it would be in History...

[Adam Reynolds]

To answer the OP, there was thermite at the site, but it was used after cleanup.
see here: http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

[Formless]

One of the problems I'm having is that whenever he brings it up, he claims that Nano-thermite is an explosive, on the theory that if you get the powder small enough, the reaction speed goes up due to the increase in surface area, until it reaches a point where it goes fast enough to explode. Now aside from the fact that it would make infinitely more sense to just use a goddamn high explosive, I do have it on good word from a chemist that there is nothing theoretically wrong with that assessment. In practice though I'm not so sure, as I don't know how small you would actually have to get the particles before it would go that fast, and I don't see why it should leave any un-reacted thermite which is supposedly what the lunatic chemist that convinced my father found near ground zero. Does anyone know what that would take?

[Formless]

To answer the OP, there was thermite at the site, but it was used after cleanup.
see here: http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

I just got finished reading that, and while it is helpful, where in there does it claim that they used thermite during the cleanup? They look like they are using ordinary welding torches to me. Also, the blog he links to to explain the cutting process they use describe them doing oxygen cutting, not thermite.

[Darth Wong]

One of the problems I'm having is that whenever he brings it up, he claims that Nano-thermite is an explosive, on the theory that if you get the powder small enough, the reaction speed goes up due to the increase in surface area, until it reaches a point where it goes fast enough to explode. Now aside from the fact that it would make infinitely more sense to just use a goddamn high explosive, I do have it on good word from a chemist that there is nothing theoretically wrong with that assessment.

Is this chemist aware that in order to be a high explosive, the reaction speed must exceed the speed of sound in the material?

In practice though I'm not so sure, as I don't know how small you would actually have to get the particles before it would go that fast, and I don't see why it should leave any un-reacted thermite which is supposedly what the lunatic chemist that convinced my father found near ground zero. Does anyone know what that would take?

I would love to see how someone justifies the claim that you can make thermite into a high explosive by reducing particle size. This seems like one of those situations where he expects to disprove a claim he has presented no evidence for in the first place. Especially since any powder is already at a significant disadvantage for reaction speed and density simply by virtue of the tiny air voids that will reduce packing efficiency below what a normal solid would have.

[Starglider]

I would love to see how someone justifies the claim that you can make thermite into a high explosive by reducing particle size.

Did he say 'high explosive' or just 'explosive'? Brisance is only really relevant if you need a shattering effect by direct shockwave; a fast-combusting material like gunpowder works fine if you just need heat and/or overpressure. Not that these claims make any sense anyway.

[Formless]

He did try and claim that. I tried to explain the difference between a low explosive and a high explosive, but my knowledge of explosives is limited so in the end he tried to claim that if thermite burned fast enough it would behave like a high explosive. I take it that explosives don't work that way?

[Sea Skimmer]

Well I read this thread when it was posted, and didn’t have an answer because I had no real knowledge of reactive material based warheads. Now I’ve read up a fair bit on them, and I can confirm that Super Themite is very real and part of a major part of new string of advances in military explosives and warhead design over the last roughly 15 years.

To make it what they do is create nano particles of Aluminum as fuel and Molybdenum trioxide as oxidizer and then actually coat the oxidizer onto the fuel through chemical processes. This allows for explosive burn velocities which are far above the materials speed of sound and which are higher then many normal high explosives. A number of other chemical compounds apparently will also work depending on what properties are most desired.

handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA419512
This is the individually best reference I can find on it and it covers a production process.

However as far as I can find no one as actually making this material on an industrial scale as of September 11th 2001, it was still in the lab phase. Numerous reactive materials are being worked on using everything from Teflon to titanium right now, so most compounds never see mass production.

Is this chemist aware that in order to be a high explosive, the reaction speed must exceed the speed of sound in the material?

The compounds they’ve created can reach up to 9,000 meters per second. The speed of sound in aluminum is roughly 6,420 m/s.

I would love to see how someone justifies the claim that you can make thermite into a high explosive by reducing particle size.

They do a little more then just make the particles size, but that works. Normal high explosives explode so fast because they are normally a single molecule that burns apart. So you pack the molecules as densely as you can to make a solid explosive. Termite must to be a powder because its two metals burning. That means the smaller the particle sizes, the denser the pack so the faster it goes.

[Darth Wong]

Wow, I must admit that takes me by surprise. So they actually coat each particle with oxidizer and then press them together to get a sintered solid?

[Sea Skimmer]

Wow, I must admit that takes me by surprise. So they actually coat each particle with oxidizer and then press them together to get a sintered solid?

Yeah. Each composite particle is 200-500 ångströms in diameter with a 25-100 Å thick coating of oxidizer. The exact values depend on just what blend of super thermite is being made, different materials need different spacing. Only a narrow range of sizes will produce supersonic results, if you have too much or too little oxidizer in the coating it will burn no faster then conventional thermite.

In conventional termite the spacing between the physically separate fuel and oxidizer particles is about 100,000 to 1,000,000 nanometers. In a normal high explosive spacing is closer to 1 nanometer and the fuel and oxidizer are usually but not always combind into one molecule. Super termite has particle spacing on the lines of 50 nanometers, and as it is metal based the individual particles have higher density and contain more energy then any conventional high explosive. That makes up for the greater spacing and allows super termite to be more powerful in certain respects then any traditional high explosive.

But as for making it solid, I cannot confirm or deny if it is possible to sinter this specific material to create solid block of explosive. However I do know that this has been done with other reactive material powder based explosives with similar ingredients including aluminum fuel, and it’s hard to think of a reason why it would not also work for super termite. Nothing would stop you from using merely compressed powder in boxes as a demolition charge in any case. Modern ammonium nitrate blasting materials are usually still powders, or else powder mixed into a gel or slurry for example.

Reactive material warheads are fucking amazing to say the least. They’ve literally changed the rules for warheads. For a prime example, a lot of shaped charges are now being made with reactive material liners, instead of plain copper or aluminum. One now common formula now is to make the warhead liner from sheets out of sintered aluminum, sprayed with an oxidizer powder. When the shaped charge fires, it compresses the reactive material into a warhead jet like normal, but the jet now explodes itself as it crushes against the target. This creates a massive thermal shock that spreads radially from the penetration, and allows the shaped charge to blow a wide crater in material like reinforced concrete, rather then just a traditional deep narrow hole. That is really handy if you want to blow up a building or a bridge pier or similar target without just tamping tons of bulk HE up against it.

For all this we have still only scratched the surface of what can be done with reactive materials (defined as explosive components which are not normally thought of as explosives). They are even talking about future torpedo warheads which will use the water as an oxidizer, and I wasn’t joking about Teflon. It’s being studied heavily for use as reactive material oxidizer.

The best thing is, most of these materials can be made into explosives will still being basically inert. So they actually can improve the safety of warheads, while also increasing firepower.

[Pulp Hero]

I've seen the nano-thermite theory gain traction with idiots. Usually on the grounds that aluminum and rust were found at the WTC ground zero. Yes, *aluminum* and *rust* were found at the bottom of a pair of destroyed buildings.

Nano-thermite suffers from the same problems as the theory that the building was secretly wired with conventional explosives. No. Fucking. Way. No way that a building could be wired without extensively drilling, removing walls, etc to place explosives. It could not be done it secret.

I also notice the distinct smell of bullshit, because whenever any flaws with the physics of the explosion or lack of reside or any other point along those lines is brought up, nano-thermite seems to gain new and mystical properties in the eyes of conspiracy theorists.

(And if really want to go down the rabbit hole of craziness, which is an easier conspiracy to pull off for the CIA:

A: Thousands of charges of experimental nano-explosives were secretly placed throughout the WTC and then detonated simaltaniously as remote controlled jets were crashed into the WTC. The supposed passengers of those jets are now in a secret government location and the hundreds of government employees that must have been directly involved have kept their mouths shut.

OR

B: The CIA co-opts the anger of radical Muslims comes up with the WTC attack plan. It discreetly proves a small amount of funds to the Muslims via its plants within the al Queda structure. The terrorists are made to genuinely believe in their plan and then carry out the attacks by crashing planes. Maybe a dozen CIA operatives at most know the attacks are a false flag attack.)

(Note: I don't believe in either of these crazy theories.)

[Serafina]

If i am not mistaken, the "theory" fails because at the time of 9-11, nano-thermite was only prodcued in labs in small quantities - and it stayed that way for a while after that.

Of course these morons would claim that you could simply upscale the production to suit the needs - imagine letting several major labs churning out a specific substance 24/7 without anyone noticing

[Sea Skimmer]

Its entirely possible a government conspiracy could wire a two or three floors per tower to separate from the vertical structure, creating the pancake effect which is certain to collapse the building. Half the work would be done from the elevator shafts, so it’s concealed out of hand. The work inside the office spaces could probably be done under cover of renovations or HVAC work. Nano Termite really would dramatically reduce the amount of explosives required, since it can both realistically burn through steel as well as explosively severing it. It also wouldn’t stink like many explosives do. Even if it was not available, a number of other reactive metal explosives were which would also have less obvious chemical signatures then say bulk HMX.

Making the planes hit would be easy enough since all you’ve got to do is hijack the existing airliner autopilot system software and fly it into the tower via GPS. More or less that should be possible through a single software update with a time delay. All the sensor imputes and control links already exist to make the plane into a missile thanks to the autopilot and autolanding systems. You just need a canister of poison gas hooked into the air system to kill everyone on the plane, terrorists present or not, to make sure that after takeoff the attack is certain to happen. Flight 93 is a little more tricky, but solutions can be found.

The real issue with conspiracy theories like this is not that they are physically impossible (though some sure area, like the people who think the US government has 30,000 miles of secret railroad tunnel) but that they lack any overwhelmingly compelling motive that would keep the people involved quiet and keep them from taking evidence home to blackmail the government with latter.

The only movies people can put out for a September 11th conspiracy are basically ‘RAR gas pipeline through Afghanistan’ and ‘excuse to invade Iraq’. The former is not even remotely credible because Afghanistan is blatantly a long term shithole and no movement has ever occurred on building the pipeline. Plus its just not that much money involved.

The latter idea is just dumb, because if the whole idea was an excuse to invade Iraq then they would have fabricated better evidence to that effect and attacked Iraq a lot sooner. Neither of these motives in any case would give the conspiracy members any real incentive to remain quiet forever. So the issue quickly spirals down a motive of the government and it’s personal just being plain evil, which is what the conspiracy theorists already believe. Conspiracy theorists however are usually nice enough to make the bullshit even easier to refute when they start rejecting ideas like the planes being able to cause heavy damage at all. Never mind the Pentagon missile thing, I mean god does that not even start to make any sense when they could just fly an airliner in by remote control anyway.

[Formless]

Airliners actually can be flown by remote control? That's news to me.

[Sea Skimmer]

Stock they can’t, but everything you’d need to do so already exists onboard except a radio transmitter hooked into the flight control computer to take in command signal. All the flight controls and sensors onboard are already linked by computers, and the computer already has the ability to fly the plane by itself, as it does when autopilot or autoland is engaged. The US military turns planes never intended for remote control into drones all the time, most of which are NOT computer controlled (like all the QF-4 drones) and thus require much more difficult conversions. So that's not a big deal, though it would require testing. But that's what Area 51B is for....

So on a somewhat modern computerized airliner, secret black agents need only install a transmitter and a change the software to allow it to override the pilots (whom the hidden gas canister will kill anyway) some months before the incidents and bingo, an airliner is now a remote control flying bomb.

Potentially you could even dispense with the remote control part, and have the airliner simply turn into a cruise missile after a timer counts down. But that’d be too much risk; it’d have to be remote triggered so the plotters can be sure all the planes are working and flying on the chosen day. If the remote system fails on one, they could just switch the others back to pilot control, and make the vast conspiracy attack another day.

The problem is simply that while efforts like this could be done, the more people in on the plot the harder it is to keep secret. When we see that the US government can’t even keep crap like torture photos from a military controlled prison on the other side of the world secret, what chance could exist that dozens or hundreds of people involved in a vast pointless murder conspiracy would have kept quiet?

This is besides the fact that conspiracies theories always go way overboard by rejecting basic logic out of hand. So instead of merely arguing that the planes were remote control they add another layer of plotting that the building had secret explosives and the Jews didn’t come to work… and it all just demonstrates that not only do they have no proof but they have no logical process at all.

[Formless]

the Jews didn’t come to work…

Hahaha, I've actually heard that one. I gotta wonder if its even true, it smells like bullshit.

[The Spartan]

What Snopes has to say on the matter of Jews and 9/11.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/israel.asp