Originally Posted by Christopher7
You don't understand why he heated the chip to 400°C rather than 430°C or 10,000°C.
There is a very, very simple and easy to understandable reason why 400°C was used in the low temperature ashing process which is designed to burn off the organic component and leave behind the remaining particulate for TEM-SAED analysis.
As we have seen if the sample is heated to 430°C then a reaction of some sort occurs and the particles that are required to be analysed are destroyed. So the absolute last thing you want to do is heat them to that temperature if your intent is to analyse the particles in the paint.
Once the particles were shown to be rhombohedral Fe2O3 and kaolin plates absolutely identical to those found in the Harrit et al paper, then there is absolutely no need to do any addition testing (which only adds to cost and time). The material has been identified: case closed.
There is no point in looking for a thermitic reaction if the materials you have characterised and identified are not thermite!
Only deluded truthers who don't understand why DSC is worthless harp on about the test not being performed.
How the hell do you manage to prove or disprove a thermitic reaction in a DSC
? Give a defined method in your own words.
You won't but we already know that you can't use your own words.
Lastly Millette is continuing with writing up the paper for review and the inconsequential microsphere nonsense will be addressed in that.
Where is the FTIR data that Harrit has but didn't include in the paper? Perhaps you should direct your ire at your heroes for not releasing their data even after a request. What are they hiding?