----- Original Message ---- From: leaking pen
> Hunh, doesnt seem that way to me. High dispersal and insane surface to area ratio is known for doing just that in chemical reactions and explosions. Look at fuel air explosives. Yes!- of course this ratio is important. But NOT for the reason you are thinking. In ffact almost the opposite. Thanks for the segue, nevertheless. Since you mentioned the surface area ratio - of fuel air explosives, as being key: let's look at that closely, as it is the defining comparison between the two very different types of reactions. The effective surface area with fuel-air explosives is much higher, incredibly higher than with superthemite. In fact, that is the only way superthemite works at all ! i.e. with less than full oxidation on the *first phase* of implosion. In fact the effective surface area ratio could be about 10^9 times higher with a complete dispersal of say LPG (gasoline or any hydrocarbon) - in air-- than when compared to 100 nm diameter iron oxide and aluminum. A lesser diameter is probably ideal but more dificult to manufacture. Therefore, as mentioned- surface area is important BUT not for the reasons you or the' official' sources were suggesting. [however, this does make for a good "red herring" if you are playing spy-vs-spy] This aboslute requirement in ballotechnics is for planned but INCOMPLETE combustion, on the first and initial phase of the reaction. This is so that the nano-particle will still have tens of thousands of atoms which are NOT on the surface of the nanopoarticle but which are going to be highly compressed for a few nanoseconds. The secondary reaction is where the real "fireworks" takes place. This then is the very reason that ballotechnics are said to be MORE energetic, not less. IOW you want the particle to burn away the surface area of atoms of small particles very rapidly but ONLY the surface area - so the interior volume of the particle reaches maximum compression (about 300,000-1,000,000 psi equivalent has been reported). This is not unlike the situation with nuclear weapons but the modality is non-nuclear and can be called suprachemical. Why? Dunno precisely - but that high compression is the intrinsic feature of a ballotechnic explosive that makes it far more energetic than a complete burn in a chemical reaction. At least this lack of understanding proves that making a project "black" does work to some degree. Actually, that underlying modality of ballotechnics is what I was trying to explain (hypothesize) in the previous post by introducing the "hydrino-less" paired-electron as *possibly* being the active unit for the greater explosiveness. This hypothesis could be accurate or not: for now, it only my" take" on it, and you will find it nowhere else, so please don't ask for an authoritative citation. These electrons will have around 54+ eV of mass-energy each to contribute - versus about 5 eV for the complete combustion of a fuel-air bomb of LPG or gasoline. By mass, the contribution is even higher by a multiple of ~2000 since the electron is of such low mass. Moreover, we know the heat energy available from those kinds of complete dispersion processes- such as we see in the fuel-air situation - is on the order of 20,000 BTU per pound of hydrocarbon (not counting the air). Now "explosiveness" is NOT heat energy per se - but it is related to a large degree. Explosiveness really gets down to acceleration (jerk, and jounce) and shock waves - rather than net energy released, but there is a direct relationship. OK - the reactants, gasoline and oxygen have a density when liquid of about one gram per cubic cm and produce 20.000 BTU per pound of gasoline -- and this is about 7000 per pound of ash (CO2). That can serve as a baseline for comparison with superthermite, which may produce up to 70,000 BTUs for the same volume (not weight) of reactant... or not. This has not been published authoritatively. Only problem is - with any black-project - the only way to compare any old weapon against superthermite is to look at specifications from countries which are trying to sell those weapons on the open market. Israel is one such country. Our military has turned this into a secret technology, despite the civilian interest, and except for that data which was published 10-20 years ago and can still be found in engineering libraries, which is where I ran across most of it - in addition to the internet. Personally, I do not have access to any current information - but those that claim to - have stated that the conventional high explosve bombs which are now replaced with superthermite are at least two times less energetic per given weight. So where does the "order of magnitude" more energetic claim fit in with only a 50% reduction in weight? ....after all a doubling of the power is far from a ten-fold increase. Well - There are several other factors which limit the gain in performance in the finished product. One is that the density of iron is seven times higher than TNT and aluminum is about 2.7 times higher, for starters. Second is that the casing of the bomb does not changed much - or may even need to be more structurally sound for superthermite. Third, is that some percentage of normal high explosive must be used to initiate the reactions. All in all, the new and improved weapon becomes half the weight as before - not 10 times less -- as the superthermite reaction alone might indicate. In civilian application - if that were to be allowed - we would not be so constrained, perhaps. We cannot know for sure if there is even a civilian application - other than brinding down tall office buildings with a minimal amount of weight to be carried in. Would society be better off knowing? Yes, I will confess that much of this, just as with the WTC7 controvery - and every other subject which is restriced by offical decree - [in the free-flow of information] - is dependent on the honesty of reports seen online or elsewhere; but since some of it can be validated with digging through old journals, then it is not as suspect as online reports alone can be. Even "Janes" has been criticised in the past as not being accurate on occasion. How could they be? since they do no basic testing -- They are merely an exclusive catalog and PR machine for the Hawks in the military and merchants of death. OTOH 'Janes' biggest customer is said to be the Pentagon ... but that could be true of 'Playboy', as well. Probably some of Hawks - like Cheney - may get-off on groping Janes' photos of weapons of mass destruction - more so than the glossy foldouts that the noncoms enjoy. Strange days. Jones
