[EugeneOregon]

Ever wonder if something that sells ounce for ounce here in Oregon for twice the price of gold (after tax) will burn? I know the answer now.

It had been suggested to me that THC boils and not combusts when lighting up with a Bic lighter. I knew of course that extract burns and owing to the soot produced believed the combustion was hydrocarbon. Tepenes are hydrocarbons and definately will conbust. A soot present in the flame indicates an abundance of carbon atoms which points directly to a hydrocarbon combustion.

THC is not a hydrocarbon because it does not contain exclusively hydrogen and carbon. The is some oxygen tucked into it too so it cannot be correctly termed a hydrocarbon. I frankly believed that it simply only boiled away and was entrained in the smoke. "Belief" and "direct observstion" are very nearly the opposite of each other so decided to onserve directly for myself.

One Pubchem reference link describes the flamability rating of Delta 9 THC (under trade name Dronabil) as "Probably". After this experiment I believe the completed answer is, "Yes".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TIMWll77DA

[SkyHighLer]

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.ph...8&postcount=18

"I tried something simple, and was surprised at the flashy response, hold a simple butane lighter's (not torch) flame just above your e-nail (about a half inch works very nicely,) without inhaling through the rig, apply a dab to the e-nail. The vapor will rise, and burst into flame when it reaches the lighter's flame. Notice the flame doesn't die down, even if you remove the lighter flame, until all the oil is gone. I did my experiment at 666F.

"Flash points are determined by slowly heating up an oil one degree at a time until a temperature is reached where a flash of fire results when a wand with a tiny flame at the tip is waved over the surface of the heated oil. What this procedure determines is the temperature of vaporization of the most volatile compounds of the oil."

The Chemistry of Essential Oils Made Simple: God's Love Expressed in Molecules by David Stewart, Ph.D., D.N.M., page 432.

I experimented with this further at temps from 400F to 600F, at 400F the vapor barely lit and went out, as I tried it again and again at higher temps, the period it stayed lit increased, leaving less and less puddle behind, finally at 578F it flamed unassisted all the way to the end of the puddle.

Thread: "Ideal Flash Vaporization Temperatures (and ways to achieve them)" by SkyHighLer,

https://www.tokecity.com/forums/showt...o-achieve-them)"

[live resin]

I don't think pure d9THC "burns", at least by the most generally accepted definition of "burning", which is a rapid oxidation producing light and heat.

Also, how would you prove its actually d9THC burning and not its decomposition products burning?

[mobin]

i've set distillate in a quartz bowl that was redhot and got an explosion that filled the air with what a black sun rotted plastic bag dusted looks like

[EugeneOregon]

Originally Posted by live resin

I don't think pure d9THC "burns", at least by the most generally accepted definition of "burning", which is a rapid oxidation producing light and heat.

Also, how would you prove its actually d9THC burning and not its decomposition products burning?

In the video link posted something combusted that was smeared onto the stainless steel. It defies my imagination for anyone to look at the video and conclude that nothing burned, so most who have viewed the video agree that something burned.

Best efforts and generally accepted efforts to purify were employed up to and including deep vacuum molecular distillation to,produce the sample for testing. Potency was confirmed through personal testing. Any substance present other than delta 9 thc would only represent a tiny fraction of the total mass being tested if indeed any other substance was present.

Your hypohesis could be correct however the visual evidence suggests otherwise. Interesting idea though. I suppose the question as it applies to anything might be interesting though. I mean, when I toss a log onto the fire, is it the wood that is burning or the decomposition products? Unknown I guess but also irrelevent. The purpose of using a Bic lighter and not a torch was to avoid introducing energies into the extract from an external source that might lead to extremely rapid decomposition.

I theorized that since I had lit up since a kid with lighter, and that since Ii had gotten high a lot that the flame from a Bic lighter did not decompose the thc in any substantial way for the period of time it takes to light up and inhale. This is substantially the test as shown in the video. The substance obviously has a higher flash point than room temp as shown on the video but the heat needed to begin the combustion we witnessed on the video was no more than just a steady Bic flame for a few seconds and certainly no more than it takes to light dry grass on fire. Since the sample seemed to combust completely and nothing droped from the test plug then the idea that it was simply breakdown products combusting becomes a bit stretched because that would mean the entire sample broke down as a byproduct in mere seconds and then went on to combust completely with only a trace of soot detectable.

I concede that this is possible but this is not the conclusion that I draw from evidence I saw and recorded in the video.

[troutman]

THC being an organic compound will burn. But what happens when you heat it is that it vaporizes and like water
will go away from the heat source. If you are applying a vacuum to it like when you are inhaling it thru a pipe or
joint it will not burn as much since you're taking it away from the heat source. But if THC was enclosed inside a
tube where it can't escape you can bet it would burn. Don't think for one second that 0% is destroyed when you
smoke it.