Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
"I think high c got a taste of what liars the bunch of you are when diddy inferred that the calls and questions were pre-screened."
Are you calling me a liar WMFT?
And what did I infer? What I posted was my first impression right after listening to the broadcast. It wasn't a lie.
If I really wanted to infer I'd have noted several disturbing observations.
1. There was a total of five callers out of thousands of shareholders.
2. Out of the five callers, one is a CDEx stock promoter on the message borads, three particpated in the CA lawsuit and one is a Loch/CDEx apologist.
3. Griffin knew four of them by their first name.
4. High C said his question wasn't pre-screened and I have no reason not to believe him, but that represents only about 10% of the questions asked. It's also interesting to note that High C's question was the only one which appeared to be misinterpreted by Griffin as Crow has pointed out.
Loch/CDEx has a history of pre-screening everything they do so until proven otherwise I will continue to have the impression that several of the questions were know in advanced.
It reminded me of a White House news conference.
doyourdd, Griffin couldn't make it any clearer:
"ValiMed is used in hospital pharmacies to
validate high risk medications that are compounded in the pharmacy by
technicians to ensure that they are the correct medication or the correct drug
in the correct concentration and are the correct diluent. This is important as a
quality assurance test before the medication is released to the hospital ward or
the operating room and that particular medication is administered to the
patient.
"How useful is valimed?"
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/09/23/deaths_of_3_babies_in_indiana_spotlight_medica....
Well doyourdd, here's what I consider to be an honest answer from a CDEx Long that apparently works in the medical field And don't forget that Valimed checks high-risk medications compounded in the pharmacy, I don't believe that the tragic deaths in Indiana fall into that category as much as the penny stock promoters would love to use the sad news to sensationalize the company's product.
By: dssu6255
19 Sep 2006, 02:56 AM EDT
Msg. 29951 of 30077
(This msg. is a reply to 29949 by L_Apollyon.)
Jump to msg. #
I don't believe that this type of error could have been prevented w/the ValiMed system.
We have caught this type of error before at the hospital I work at. 100u/ml heparin is mistakenly stocked in the neonate Pyxis instead of the 10u/ml vial.
It's just plain stupid human error, that requires pharmacy and nursing staff to triple check the vial label strength before stocking and administering.
It wouldn't be practical to "test" the substance of every vial that's taken from stock for administration. All that's needed is to READ the vial label correctly in the first place to ascertain whether it's the correct strength.
These types of problems which happen way to often, have to be prevented by good old-fashioned human concentration. No machine is going to quick fix this situation.
- - - - -
Nice job by Griffin. Good questions by all five callers.
It reminded me of a TV news conference by President Bush, all reporters are known by their first name and all questions have been reviewed before being answered.
I hope the conference puts to rest some of the questions about UV vs. NIR and liquids vs. solids.
MM's are sure bouncing the B/A around.
Sand,
"Whaddyawannabet spinach is at the root of it all!"
Isn't spinach a leaf? LOL
I'm off to see what Closer has to say about CDEx... I'll be back
"The joke is that people like you, who have no interest in the stock, and including those that have had no interest (supposedly) in more than half a decade..."
That is a very, very incorrect assumptions as far as I'm concerned Detroit.
I have a very keen interest.
Welp RA, that's not what concerns me the most about this penny stock. The red flag I see is when stock promoters work recent news headlines into their advertisements to sensationalize the company's products.
It's like Crow said, find a crisis getting news attention and build a product around it. That's what all penny stock scams do.
It sure looks like the Loch/CDEx operation got caught with their pants down after 911. Hyping a revolutionary device capable of detecting trace explosive, in real time with great stand-off distances and coming up with nothing when the country really needed it. Instead they shelf it. Hello!
Just think how the stock promoters could have weaved all the 911 news headlines into the company's revolutionary product. I bet (sorry Scared) they salvate just thinking about it! LOL
Thank goodness CDEX has come up with the meth gun. I can hardly wait to see how it compares to the originally advertsied performance claims of Loch/CDEx.
Sanddollar, CDEx probably had to sharpen their pencil and make some budget cuts.
Crow, based on some recent posts on the TCL board by dssu6255 and others I think CDEX needs to get that cheaper unit out sooner than later. There's only so many hospitals that can be skimmed for top dollar before the sales price needs to be corrected to start targeting more of the market.
Offering a 38% discount is a start, but apparently it's still not low enough for the smaller hospitals.
If you take away all the hospitals that were paid or otherwise compensated partners, I wonder how many Valimeds have been sold at full asking price.
Breakeven is still a long way in the distance IMO.
In the mean time, CDEX continues to sell their most successful product to finance a 20 miilion dollar development that should have cost a fraction of that amount.
That's exactly why institutions do not invest in the penny stock market. Unreal.
Crow, Valimed is hitting the cream of the crop right now. Those hospitals are few and far between. If Valimed is going to be a winner it must sell into samller hospitals.
There are well established marketing strategies for this and right now I'll have to admit that CDEX is on target. They have to get endorsed by the big boys first, then come out with an affordable product for samll hospitals.
The jury is still out on this one and as I said, I doubt will see anything close to a verdict until well into '07.
Break even point after $20,000,000 of R&D money? Valimed would have to be a amazing success for that to occur. It would hav eto be selling at a lower sales price with less profit. I don't see it.
I see CDEX still in the primary business of selling stock. Look at their promoters. 24/7 Unreal.
My overall opinion, there are still dirty rotten scoundrels involved with this stock that should be in jail and that includes several people that are currently associated with CDEx.
It still stinks and only the insiders will come out ahead IMO.
Ask Closer, why do you think he's telling the long suffering ex-loch shareholders to watch the volume.
Yes! it will run like Loch, but the MM's aren't on your side and you can miss the window of opportunity and watch all the insiders get rich.
Griffin can make it happen. Why was he hired and who do you think he's looking out for? LOL!!!!!!!!!!! Track record?
OOPS! Sorry crow, I was directing this post to you at the start. LOL!
High C, with the army of attorneys which CDEx retained to handle the suit, do you really think they considerd it a joke or simply "a shot across the bow"?
I don't believe any reasonable person would have had that impression.
WMFT,
I suppose we will learn, as time goes on, how much ASD has to pay us for infringing on our patent and technology."
And what patent would that be? The new X-RAY patent?
You're starting to sound like doyourdd! LOL
Paige, agreed. Please 'splain the reason why to doyourdd.
"What value do you assign and why? Explain"
Welp, here's how I see it:
If for no other reason, the x-ray patent application gave investors the belief that Loch/CDEx really did have top-secret revolutionary technology which had been rescued from the Boyz. There is no doubt in my mind that that is the reason CDEx allowed the patent application to be broadcasted all over the message boards.
Investors were reassured that there was a viable XRF technology as touted by Boone, Baker, and Philips which used x-rays to detect trace explosives at two meters in real time AND THAT IT HAD VALUE.
It helped solidify the bad cop, good cop portrait.
It prevented criminal prosecutuion IMO.
It prevented numerous civil law suits being slapped on eveyone involved in the Loch scam by showing the disgruntle investors that there really was a tech worth protecting and it wasn't blatantly false and misleading advertisement after all.
And last but not least, the patent has given CDEx protection if they ever decide to build a XRF that can detect and discriminate molecules of interest from a stand-off distance of at least about one meter as specified in ALL PATENT CLAIMS.
Let's stop and rethink this for a minute... if CDEx ever decides to build a detection device where the incident x-rays and return signal travel through a stand-off distance (not necessarily open air, but that would afford the most viable applications) of about one meter they have patent protection. That is the novel factor in ever one of their claims and without meeting that criterion, there is no protection IMO.
Do I ever foresee a product being manufactured based on this patent? NO! And I stated that opinion both before the patent app was ever filed, and now, after it as been granted.
So what did this cost CDEx? Don't know, but I think even $30-40K would have been a deal
"Guess their won't be too many Meth detectors like ours."
Your previous posts suggest to me that you believe the new patent is protectng the meth gun?
Is this what you believe?
Don't read into it too much Paige, this company has a typical penny stock behavior- lots of talk and little action except selling shares.
The less people understand the technology the more readily they are willing to believe it's revolutionary out of ignorance.
If someone tells you it's revolutionary, you'll believe them as long as you can be convinced that they know more than you.
Some of the paid, on-line Loch/CDEx stock promoters have worked these boards pretty good using that tactic with their "considered opinions" and "direct pipeline to the scientists".
Good luck to the honest investor.
What ever happen to the good ole days:
"Behold CDEx" (TM- Riorancho}
...so has the counterfeit drug detection market of which solid dosage form is 90% of the market.
Oh well.... same ole, same ole. Settlement agreement will remain confidential. Same caveats, same shoestring.
My forecast holds, mid '07 to evaluate the Valimed market, late '07 early '08 to evaluate meth gun sales if approved by KSHP.
Niche, niche, niche...
Geez Spgianna, and I thought maybe you knew something the way you claim to be throwing money into this penny stock:
By: spgianna
13 Sep 2006, 11:34 AM EDT
Msg. 29781 of 29784
(This msg. is a reply to 29772 by pookie89014.)
Pookie & All:
The Patent Approval for Cdex has to mean the lawsuit settlement was in our favor...imo!
The patent granted to CDEx is for X-RAY FLUORESCENCE and ALL claims for detection are at "AT LEAST ABOUT ONE METER".
Valimed operates in the UV range at under an inch stand-off. The law suit settlement has nothing to do with this patent!!
Besides, the patent was awarded before the lawsuit was ever filed!
And I thought you were so well connected with the facts!
I'm very disappointed, I hope you're not another insider shill like the other stock promoters that spam/spammed these boards.
Read a little further Paige:
"Another bottle-scanner is being tested in the Homeland Security Department's lab that compares a liquid's molecular structure to a library of about 30 combustible liquids installed in the machine's software.
The $30,000 machine developed by New Mexico-based Senspex employs technology that has long been used in labs."
It is pictured in the article.
Another detector based on Raman Spectroscopy.
"I don't understand...If everything is so positive why aren't they in the Airports?"
Apparently, detection of over 2500 liquids and solids in 15 seconds at 95% accuracy isn't good enough for the TSA.
Ideally , they want 100% screening of passengers with no further throughput delays than currently exist.
That's nothing that is going to happen soon IMO.
Baby steps.
Is this updated information Paige?
Ahura’s First Defender Meets Bottle Screening Challenge
FirstDefender Rugged handheld chemical identification system accurately reads explosives, narcotics and industrial chemicals through bottles and bags
Wilmington, MA - August 11, 2006 — Ahura Corporation, manufacturer of the FirstDefender Handheld Chemical Identification system, today revealed that they have been working with a number of federal agencies as well as state and local hazmat teams for the instantaneous identification of chemicals and explosives. Ahura technology has the ability to “look” through bottles and bags without the operator needing to open them. Due to the sensitive nature of the customer community, the company has been keeping a low profile. Based on global events, the company recognized the need for rapid deployment of its technology to the federal security agencies, with which it’s been working, as well as to law enforcement, firefighters, hazmat and the military. “State and local governments, small regional airports and municipal transportation authorities are among the many other organizations that can improve public safety through the use of our products”, says Doug Kahn, Ahura Corporation Chairman and CEO.
The FirstDefender was developed in collaboration with industry leaders in the military and first responder community and is designed for use by soldiers, fire fighters, law enforcement and homeland security personnel It is being quickly deployed to teams across numerous federal agencies including the Army, Customs and Immigration, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Homeland Security. Hazmat teams across the country ranging from New York, Washington, D.C., Orlando and Seattle are actively using the product, along with law enforcement agencies from the State Police of New Jersey to the Los Angeles Police Department. Dozens of other cities, counties and state agencies rely on FirstDefender for its accuracy and usability. Independently tested by the U.S. Army’s Edgewood Chemical and Biological Center (ECBC), FirstDefender is available via federal and state grants, the New York State HIRE contract, the GSA schedule and CEDAP.
About Ahura Corporation
Ahura Corporation develops rugged, innovative, ultra-compact, field-enabled optical systems for the detection, identification and authentication of unknown and suspect substances. Customers include the homeland security, life sciences, industrial and medical markets. Manufactured in the USA in an ISO 9001 certified operation, Ahura’s products offer superior performance at competitive prices. Ahura has been recognized with a number of awards, including awards from Red Herring, Frost & Sullivan and IDSA. More information at www.ahuracorp.com.
http://www.ahuracorp.com/press/pr_20060811.html
The big difference between trace detection and Raman spectroscopy is that traces detect the presence of the specific substances you are looking for," said Hill. "If you don't know if a specific substance is there, but you want to know, then use trace technology. If you know [a substance] is there but you don't know what it is, then you use Raman spectroscopy to identify it."
Raman spectroscopy is an optical technique, so unless a residue is visible on the outside of a bag, the bag must be opened so that a monochromatic laser can illuminate the objects inside.
Raman libraries of recognizable substances are more extensive than trace libraries, but Raman spectroscopy requires a larger sample. Trace technology concentrates on identifying the few substances of particular concern to the Transportation Security Administration, but it works with nanograms or even picograms of the substance.
"Raman spectroscopy works on substances you can see," said Hill. "If a bag is open, screeners can use Raman spectroscopy to interrogate transparent containers to find out what is inside them."
Raman spectroscopy works similarly to gas chromatography. First the screener shines a laser on the unidentified substance or container, energizing the substance and thereby driving its electrons into higher-than-normal orbits. As the electrons drop back to their ground state, they release photons. A photodetector collects the photons, and software analyzes their colors for shifts that match substances in the Raman library.
"Depending on what frequency bands the scattered signal gets shifted to, you can develop a fingerprint for what is in there," said Hill. "Then software matches those shifts with a library of known fingerprints."
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=TWLLAN4LIFKP0QSNDLSCKHA?articleID=19...
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/
showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid
=TWLLAN4LIFKP0QSNDLSCKHA?articleID=192700275
"BACKGROUND: Valimed, a new monitoring system, flashes an ultraviolet light on tiny samples of chemotherapy drugs to make sure the right combination and dose of chemotherapy is being administered to each patient. It's the same principle used to detect bombs."
I'm curious what Mr. Willis is referring to when he states it's the same technology used to detect bombs.
Where is the technology being used to detect bombs? Is it a different technology than the one the Army and Navy dismissed?
Is he talking about the 3-4 staged demos conducted by Loch?
Or is he referring to the laboratory demonstrations observed by Brian Jenkins and others with all the tests reported with incomplete operating parameters.
As far as I can remember the only tests ever witnessed at significant stand-off distance and reasonable integration time were all rigged demos where the participating parties had been paid off with shares or payola.
The claims of trace detection up to 30 meters in real time has been downgraded to Valimed, measuring bulk chemicals at under an inch in a optically pristine box on a laboratory bench.
It will be interesting to see how well the meth gun performs compared to all the grandiose claims of the past.
Years? LOL Try two weeks ago.
In reference to Brian Jenkin's statement after observing CDEX lab demo of the trace explosive detection technology: Capnmike attempts to correlate "successful translation into the field" with Valimed (non-exsistent at the time of Jenkin's comment).
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=12618899
Classic insider hyping.
" All current CDEX products are based on applying the same underlying photoelectric technology for which the company has five additional patents pending. CDEX has also filed corresponding international applications for each of these patents."
http://www.micromedex.com/pressroom/news_feeds/?story_ID=93081&category=1
Hmmmmm... "photoelectric" seems to be used in a broad sense in this content, but one should not confuse molecular fluoresence with the photoelectric effect IMO.
What do you think ICCDP, another shade-tree scientist comment? LOL
It works? Great news doyourdd!! In fact, that's the best news since capnmike publicly announced that CDEx trace explosive detection technology has been "successfully translated to the field"!
"Soon the whole world will know about CDEx technology"
-Stan
LMAO!!!
Detroit77,
No need to respond to yet another one of WMFT's conspiracy theories about his imaginary "group", diddy the "rocket scientist" or "diddy's illness"- all not true.
I'm in no group, I'm not a rocket scientist and an illness never prevented me from attending the show.
Did I become "quiet" when three Valimeds were sold? No, I was already "quiet" when there was no news of Valimed sales.
Not much happening until the next 10Q.
An honest evaluation of the success of Valimed- not until early-mid 2007.
Feedback from the meth gun testing- not until early 2007.
If the meth gun works well enough to produce a market: no significant sales until late 2007.
Lawsuit notwithstanding.
"Usually when something burns, it is subsonic and there is very little pressure effect. With high explosives, the rate of burning is extremely rapid and exceeds the speed of sound. As a result of that there is something called "overpressure" - pressure greater than the surrounding atmospheric pressure. Massive overpressure is not needed to cause damage. An excess of 1% can break windows, and an overpressure of 10% can harm or kill people and cause structural damage to buildings. An overpressure of just 2% could break the windows of the aeroplane, and 10% would wreck the aircraft and possibly kill the people in it before it reached the ground. By the time the damage is caused, the chemistry has finished and physics has taken over."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1681244/posts
It’s Not Hard to Use Fluids to Cause an Explosion on a Plane, Chemists Say
The Perfidious NY Times ^ | August 11, 2006 | KENNETH CHANG and WILLIAM J. BROAD
Posted on 08/11/2006 7:55:30 AM PDT by neverdem
Lethal and Wet
Of the hundreds of types of explosives, most are solid and only about a dozen are liquid. But some of those liquid explosives can be readily bought, and others can be put together from hundreds of different kinds of chemicals that are not hard to obtain.
A memo issued by federal security officials about the new plot highlighted a type of liquid explosive based on peroxide.
The most common peroxide explosive is triacetone triperoxide or TATP, which is made from two liquids: acetone, the primary ingredient of most nail polish removers, and hydrogen peroxide, commonly used as an antiseptic when diluted. TATP, which can be used as a detonator or a primary explosive, has been used in Qaeda-related bomb plots and by Palestinian suicide bombers.
TATP itself is a white powder made up of crystals that form when acetone and hydrogen peroxide are mixed together, usually with a catalyst added to speed the chemical reactions. But there is no need to wait for the crystals. Acetone and peroxide is “an exceedingly reactive mixture” that can be easily detonated by an electrical spark, said Neal Langerman, president of Advanced Chemical Safety, a consulting company in San Diego.
Acetone is easy to obtain, hydrogen peroxide somewhat harder. The hydrogen peroxide solution sold in pharmacies is too dilute, only 3 percent, to be used in an explosive. Stronger hydrogen peroxide of 30 percent concentration can be ordered from chemical supply companies, but concentrations strong enough to generate a powerful explosion, about 70 percent, are not readily available, Dr. Langerman said.
But acetone mixed with a 30 percent peroxide solution could still set off a fire that might burn through the aluminum skin of an airliner and cause it to crash, Dr. Langerman said.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1681846/posts
July 28, 2006 H-SB06.1-002 Reliable Peroxide-Based Explosives Detection with Low False ...
http://www.techconnectnd.com/archive/current.html
"Another bottle-scanner is being tested in the Homeland Security Department's lab that compares a liquid's molecular structure to a library of about 30 combustible liquids installed in the machine's software.
The $30,000 machine developed by New Mexico-based Senspex employs technology that has long been used in labs.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2005-11-07-security-devices_x.htm
I'm surprised the last link made it thru censorship! LOL
It seems there's some misinformation about the explosives which were to be used in those thwarted airline bombings.
Here's some interesting dialogue about peroxide explosives and there instability
http://yarchive.net/explosives/peroxide.html
The Synthesis of Acetone Peroxide
by unstable247
NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain text files and messages contained on this site deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State, and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. The webmasters of this site do not advocate the breaking of any law. Our text files and message bases are for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon any information obtained from this or any other web site. We do not guarantee that any of the information contained on this system is correct, workable, or factual. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of any information on this site.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetone peroxide is one of the few explosives that can be quite easily made from materials that can be readily bought with no questions asked. For this reason, many young fools who know little about the chemistry of the reaction have attempted making it. With little knowledge on the topic, the chances of injury or death become much, much, higher. This is why I decided to make a detailed article going over the often overlooked fact of acetone peroxide. Hopefully this will help clear up the mistakes often found on inaccurate textfiles that can be found using a simple search engine, and provide an enjoyable experience with much less danger than usual.
NOTE: The information provided from this point on is strictly for informational purposes only. The production and use of acetone peroxide is illegal as well as very dangerous. I, the author, take no responsibility for how this information is used.
Acetone peroxide appears as a white powder to the unobservant eye. However, it is actually a crystalline compound. Acetone peroxide (or AP, as it will hereby be referred to as) can be ignited with a flame or spark, and will then deflagrate at an explosive rate. This deflagration produces hot gasses that are capable of bursting relatively strong containers, which makes it apparently a good explosive for firecrackers.
AP can also be detonated with a blasting cap. If a sufficient shockwave is sent through it (the shockwave needn’t be very powerful), the AP will detonate and therefore decompose at a significantly faster rate than when deflagration occurs. What this basically means is that, when detonated by a blasting cap, AP will explode much more powerfully.
The one main downfall of AP is its sensitivity. It is one the most sensitive explosives commonly manufactured. This downfall is the very reason that makes AP so dangerous, and is why so many of the “fools” that attempted making it have been badly injured, or even killed. A small amount of AP will detonate if tapped with a hammer on a hard surface. If stepped on it will go off under the weight of a human. The truth of the matter is, AP is no toy. It should be taken seriously before manufacture, during manufacture, and after manufacture.
Getting the Materials
There are three chemicals needed to make acetone peroxide. If searched for, one can often find them at common stores, at least in the US.
Hydrogen Peroxide H2O2
This is the easiest chemical to find that is needed in the AP reaction. If 27 or 30% hydrogen peroxide can be found, then it will produce higher yields when used. However, a change in the percentage will mean a change in the ratio, or amount used. The ratio involved uses 3% hydrogen peroxide, because of its availability. 3% hydrogen peroxide can be easily bought at any drug store, pharmacy, or local convenient store. It can be found in the medical aisle at Jewel. It’s used as an antiseptic for cleaning wounds. It typically sells for less than a buck a bottle, and one bottle is more than enough for two of the reactions described here. Remember, if you come across a different strength peroxide, it should only be used if you are good enough in chemistry to do the math and figure out which change in ratio will be correct.
Acetone CH3COCH3
Acetone is a colorless, volatile, extremely flammable liquid ketone. It is often used as an organic solvent, and is therefore available as a paint thinner. If you go to the paint section in your local hardware store, acetone can often be found in a metal container labeled “Acetone”. It is important to check the container to make sure that the contents are 100% pure acetone, since impurities can be horrible for the reaction. Acetone is the main ingredient in nail polish remover, but it’s not the only ingredient. So nail polish remover has impurities, which makes it a bad substitute for acetone in the AP process.
Sulfuric Acid H2SO4
Sulfuric acid will probably be the most difficult-to-find ingredient in the AP process. It is used as a catalyst in the reaction, helping to make acetone and hydrogen peroxide react upon each other to form acetone peroxide, without adding any elements to the reaction. Since it is just a catalyst, other acids, such as strong hydrochloric acid, can be used. However, for optimum results, 85% or stronger sulfuric acid is recommended. Car battery acid is typically around 40% sulfuric acid and often has lead impurities, so it’s not that good for this application. 90% or higher sulfuric acid can usually be found as a drain opener in some hardware stores. 93% H2SO4 can be found under the brand name “Pro Liquid Drain Opener” and is often available near other drain openers in hardware stores, some as well known as The Home Depot and Menards. Always check the ingredients of chemicals you buy to make sure they’re what you want.
You will also need a 600ml beaker, or similar glass container. You will also need a graduated cylinder, plastic or glass. It should go up to 50ml, unless you’re not using a beaker with measurements, in which case it should go up to about 100ml. You will definitely need an alcohol or mercury thermometer. It should have a Celsius scale that goes down to less than zero and goes up to more than 40. You will also need something to stir with. If you can get a glass stirring rod, then use that. If you cant get one, use the thermometer to stir. You definitely want something glass or wood, preferably glass. You don’t want plastic or metal, unless its plastic made for stirring chemistry mixtures. You’ll need a funnel, and some filter paper. A coffee filter works great.
Procedure:
Pour 500ml of 3% hydrogen peroxide into the beaker
Put the beaker in an ice bath (a larger bowl filled with ice and cold water, and often salt) until it cools to about 5 degrees Celsius. This might take awhile, but be patient.
Pour 60ml of acetone into the peroxide, and stir until thoroughly mixed. As a general rule of thumb, when using 3% hydrogen peroxide, you should use 5 times as much peroxide as acetone.
Measure out 15ml of acid. This is quite a bit, considering the other amounts, but through testing it has been found that more acid will catalyze more ingredients faster, and better. You can use as little as 5 or even 3ml, but to be safe, 15ml works great. Once you’ve got it measured out in the graduated cylinder (that should have a spout), pour the acid very slowly into the mixture, a couple drops at a time, while constantly stirring. The temperature of the mixture should never go above 10 degrees Celsius. If it gets to about 8 or 9 degrees C, stop pouring the acid and keep stirring until the temperature gets back to normal. Keep doing this until all the acid is in the mixture.
Keep stirring for about 5-10 minutes.
Then place the beaker (with the ice bath, if possible) into a refrigerator, making sure the temperature is kept below 10 degrees C. Keep it in there for 24-48 hours, the latter preferably. Stir periodically. After about 12-24 hours, you should start to see the mixture turn a kind of milky white, and there should be some shiny crystals on top. There might also be some precipitate on the bottom. Once you believe that precipitation is complete, take the beaker out of the fridge.
Now take the coffee filter, of filter paper. It should be a circle. Fold it in half once. You should have a semicircle. Now fold it in half again, getting a quarter circle. Look on the curved part of the quarter circle and split apart two of the layers, they should be one of the outside layer, and the one next to that. This should form a cone. Place this cone inside the funnel, and pour the mixture through it, and have the rest of the mixture go into a jar or a glass. Since filter paper and coffee filters are very fine, this could take awhile, but it will get every single particle in there, so it’s worth it. Dispose of the liquid in the jar. Then pour about 400 ml of distilled water over the crystals, to remove all remaining acid.
Leave these crystals somewhere indoors to air dry overnight.
The white powder in the filter the next morning should be tricycloacetone peroxide.
Now, some notes. The mixture must be kept below 10 degrees Celsius. If the crystals form at this temperature, it forms the isomer called tricycloacetone peroxide, which is relatively stable and safe to handle. If the crystals form above this temperature, the dimerric form, called dicycloacetone peroxide. This isomer is much more unstable, and could go off at the touch, making it not safe enough to be considered a practical explosive. As long as the temperature is kept below 10 degrees Celsius, then there is little to worry about. However, if the crystals are stored in a container with high walls for too long, then the AP will volatilize, then reform on the walls of the container. Remember, that when this reformation occurs, the temperature is well above 10 degrees Celsius. So the crystals that formed on the walls are actually the dimerric form, and are very dangerous. They need to be discarded as safely as possible. If the AP needs to be stored, it should be dampened with water, the stored in an airtight container.
Well, now you have yourself some acetone peroxide. What to do with it, you ask? Fortunately, there are some fun ways to use AP that are conveniently provided here.
AP Sandwiches
Take two nickels and put an amount of AP between them. Then take a strip of scotch tape, and stick it around the rims of the nickels; it should hang over on both sides. Take this overhang and push it down, so it sticks to the flat sides of the nickels. At all times, don’t push too hard on the nickels, unless you’re into missing fingers. But they can be pressed together kind of softly, without going off. Once they’re taped, throw the AP sandwich about 40-50 feet in the air, so it lands on concrete. When it hits, the AP will detonate, and a loud boom will be heard. They beat the pants off of snapdragons.
AP Putty
AP putty is a very powerful, castable explosive. To make it, mix acetone with double based smokeless powder (available at most gun shops). Mix the two until the smokeless powder dissolves, forming a pasty substance. Once the desired viscosity is achieved, start pouring some acetone peroxide into it. Pour quite a bit in there, so the ratio of paste to AP is about 1:1. Now you can cast this putty into any container, and wait for it to dry. Since acetone is so volatile, it shouldn’t take that long to dry out. Before it dries out, though, be sure to insert some sort of ignition device. A fuse works, as does a solar igniter. Anyway, once dried out and set off, this putty detonates both the AP and the smokeless powder. Seriously, this is God awful powerful stuff, considering its simplicity.
AP/AN Booster
If AP is mixed with ammonium nitrate, it can be used as an effective booster charge. The ratio usually used is about 3:1 AP to ammonium nitrate. This mixture is to be confined and detonated with a blasting cap (cool part is, the cap can be AP as well). This booster charge is powerful enough to detonate significant amounts of ANFO. Usually dynamite or TNT is used to detonate ANFO, but this booster is much easier to get by, and works. If a more powerful cap is used, then the ratio of AP to AN can near 1:1, as this will be more powerful, but more difficult to detonate.
THIS IS YOUR WARNING! Acetone peroxide is a very dangerous explosive meant to be handled by explosives experts. Tampering with it is playing Russian Roulette; there’s a very good chance you’ll get hurt or killed. By taking the proper precautions that were mentioned here, the chances of injury decrease greatly. So, think before you act, and be careful.
http://www.totse.com/en/bad_ideas/ka_fucking_boom/162660.html
Acetone peroxide (triacetone triperoxide, peroxyacetone, TATP, TCAP) is an organic peroxide and a primary high explosive. It takes the form of a white crystalline powder with a distinctive acrid smell.
Chemistry
Also known as "peroxyacetone", acetone peroxide most commonly refers to the cyclic trimer TCAP (tri-cyclic acetone peroxide, or tri-cyclo), also called triacetone triperoxide (TATP), obtained by a reaction between hydrogen peroxide and acetone (using a catalyst). The cyclic dimer (C6H12O4) and open monomer and dimer are also formed, but under proper conditions the cyclic trimer is the primary product. A tetrameric form was also described. In mildly acidic or neutral conditions, the reaction is much slower and produces more monomeric organic peroxide than the reaction with a strong acid catalyst. Due to significant strain of the chemical bonds in the dimer and especially the monomer, they are even more unstable than the trimer.
At room temperature, the trimeric form slowly sublimes, reforming as the less stable, more sensitive dimer.
TCAP generally burns when ignited, unconfined, in quantities less than about 2 grams. More than 2 grams will usually detonate when ignited; smaller quantities might detonate when even slightly confined. Completely dry TCAP is much more prone to detonation than the fresh product still wetted with water or acetone. The oxidation that occurs when burning is:
2 C9H18O6 + 21 O2 → 18 H2O + 18 CO2
The explosive decomposition of TCAP, in contrast, results in "formation of acetone and ozone as the main decomposition products and not the intuitively expected oxidation products."[2] It is the rapid creation of gas from a solid that creates the explosion. Very little heat is created by the explosive decomposition of TCAP. Recent research describes TCAP decomposition as an entropic explosion.
The extreme shock, heat, and friction sensitivity are due to the instability of the molecule. Big crystals, found in older mixtures, are more dangerous, as they are easier to shatter - and initiate - than small ones.
Many people have been killed or permanently injured by accidents with acetone peroxide. It is widely used by people who want to make homemade explosives because of its low cost and ease of manufacture. They may be unaware of its extreme sensitivity; or they make it anyway because it is cheap and can be made in a refrigerator.
There is a common myth that the only "safe" acetone peroxide is the trimer, made at low temperatures: "If one is making tricycloacetone peroxide, the temperature must be less than 10 °C at all times, otherwise the product formed will be dicycloacetone peroxide, which is so unstable and sensitive that it has no uses in the field of explosives: dicycloacetone peroxide has been known to explode spontaneously." [citation needed] In reality, the acid-catalyzed peroxidation of acetone always produces a mixture of dimeric and trimeric forms.
The trimer is the more stable form, but not much more so than the dimer. All forms of acetone peroxide are very sensitive to initiation. Organic peroxides are sensitive, dangerous explosives. The military does not use them because there are many much better alternatives. Even for people who synthesize homemade explosives, there are many far safer alternatives. Even nitroglycerin is not nearly as sensitive as acetone peroxide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetone_peroxide