Split Thread The Towers should not hve collapsed (split from Gravysites)

[Jonnyclueless]

Dab, could you please write a paper for peer review showing exactly how you can predict the colors and temperatures of everything in the building? Please, put it in a white paper and let's see how your research stands up. Thanks.

 

[beachnut]

None of these alternative explanations really strike me as explaining the observed in a convincing fashion. Oxygen tanks would explode and cause a short outburst of flames. Short circuits don't cause this amount. I refuted aluminium earlier.

Note that this would not be a thermate reaction per se (which would have happened in the inside of the core) but instead, the thermate product - sulfur/managenese-rich iron flowing from the central column to the edge (due to buckling of the floors - the peripherial columns are missing)

There were oxygen generators on board the plane, a lot of them; they do this.

You meant to say they burn at high temperatures. They can destroy planes and make them crash.

There seems to be infinite things 9/11 truth lacks knowledge on to be so wrong on every single thing 9/11.

If you are a thermite fan, just remember Jones made it all up, and you believe in pure made up junk ideas, i.e., fantasy. Cool

you have not proven Al was not pouring out the building, or other cheap metals that make up cheap computer case etc. Sad you are stuck on a tangent, and like fantasy ideas of 9/11 truth. This could be due to lack of knowledge on subjects related to 9/11, and lack of experience. You may be gullible too.

 

[Dabljuh]

There were oxygen generators on board the plane, a lot of them; they do this.

You meant to say they burn at high temperatures. They can destroy planes and make them crash.

There seems to be infinite things 9/11 truth lacks knowledge on to be so wrong on every single thing 9/11.

If you are a thermite fan, just remember Jones made it all up, and you believe in pure made up junk ideas, i.e., fantasy. Cool

you have not proven Al was not pouring out the building, or lead, or other cheap metals that make up cheap computer case etc. Sad you are stuck on a tangent, and like fantasy ideas of 9/11 truth. This could be due to lack of knowledge on subjects related to 9/11, and lack of experience. You may be gullible too.

Your tone drives me to the verge of ignoring you. Because your argument isn't nearly as strong as your posture would indicate.

Oxygen generators are large chemical tanks that contain combustible (read: unstable, consumed in fire) materials. You're suggesting that they not only survived the initial impact of the airliners, but also survived until minutes before the impact of the towers to release their contents, producing a flame of 3000K without anybody noticing bright white flames/explosions, in the process melting aluminum from the plane neatly stacked around it to 2500K to make it glow as bright as steel does at 1500K?

That's your theory?

If you want me to put you on ignore, just keep posting idiocy like that.

 

[WildCat]

Oxygen generators are large chemical tanks that contain combustible materials. You're suggesting that they not only survived the initial impact of the airliners, but also survived until minutes before the impact of the towers to release their contents, producing a flame of 3000K

Do you realize that is 4,940 F?

without anybody noticing bright white flames/explosions, in the process melting aluminum from the plane neatly stacked around it to 2500K

4,040 F? Why would you think the temps were this high?

to make it glow as bright as steel does at 1500K?

2,240 F, again how do you get this temperature?

 

[Dabljuh]

Do you realize that is 4,940 F?
4,040 F? Why would you think the temps were this high?
2,240 F, again how do you get this temperature?

I posted about it earlier. The formula to calculate the total energy emitted by an object due to its temperature is:

W/A = e * o * T^4

Where

W is the work
A is surface area
e is the emissivity factor (Steel is around 0.5 depending on composition, aluminium is 0.1)
o is the Boltzmann constant, and
T is the temperature in kelvin.

Read more about it at the Wikipedia Article on the Boltzmann Law.

This is the total amount of work released by a surface's temperature, as such it is a relatively accurate representation of an item's "brightness"

However if you want to calculate the actual color by yourself, it gets a whole lot more complicated - which is why you'd use a simple blackbody spectrum cheat sheet.

What I ended up with is that iron would emit about as much energy at 1600K as aluminium would at 2500K.

but it'd also have a different color (much whiter, less yellow) and it wouldn't become orange as quickly as the observed object - in fact, at 'orange' temperatures, aluminium probably wouldn't even be noticeable at this distance.

Oh, and about the 3000K figure - I simply figured the flame would have to be at least a good 500K hotter than whatever you're trying to heat to 2500K to make it happen with some speed.

P.S. Are you telling me you've been arguing about the whole thermate story without understanding how blackbody radiation works? I guess, only someone not familiar with the basics of blackbody radiation would!

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Once again, how about a white paper showing that the metal dripping from the building could only have been steel and nothing else.

 

[beachnut]

Your tone drives me to the verge of ignoring you. Because your argument isn't nearly as strong as your posture would indicate.

Oxygen generators are large chemical tanks that contain combustible (read: unstable, consumed in fire) materials. You're suggesting that they not only survived the initial impact of the airliners, but also survived until minutes before the impact of the towers to release their contents, producing a flame of 3000K without anybody noticing bright white flames/explosions, in the process melting aluminum from the plane neatly stacked around it to 2500K to make it glow as bright as steel does at 1500K?

That's your theory?

If you want me to put you on ignore, just keep posting idiocy like that.

Even UBL beats you at understanding 9/11. Poor 9/11 truth.

There is nothing wrong with the fact oxygen generators could be burning in the crash. I just posted what they do when they burn. Your ideas on 9/11 are pure idkiocy, and you do not know it yet. Why do you lack so much knowledge on things related on 9/11, and you seem to lack experience, or are so bias you cannot function to understand 9/11; which is it?

Thermite is idiocy. If you believe in thermite used to bring down the WTC, then you believe idiot ideas. I would not ignore hour posts, I use them as examples of ignorant ideas, and how far someone will go to make up a story about 9/11 that is false.

 

[beachnut]

Read more about it at the Wikipedia Article on the Boltzmann Law.

wow, another super internet source. Wonder if it is right? How do you figure out it the vanity encyclopedia is telling the truth. About every other expert nut case 9/11 truther is on wiki, how can you use such a trash heap/wasteland for information without another source.

I guess it could be right. But then your conclusion was proven wrong 6 years ago.

 

[~enigma~]

I guess, only someone not familiar with the basics of blackbody radiation would!

 

[Dabljuh]

Once again, how about a white paper showing that the metal dripping from the building could only have been steel and nothing else.

You're still on ignore, but I'll grant you this answer because you're asking nicely enough.

It could have been many things, such as an eutectic iron mix, it could have been copper, it *may* have been steel or glass (although that's somewhat doubtful due to apparent viscuous behaviour - but the video is fairly low res, and the sparks as it drops point towards steel/eutectic iron rather than glass), it could have been other things.

And many things it could not have been - such as pure iron. Pure iron would have been solid at the observed temperature. It couldn't have been lead. It couldn't have been aluminium. It couldn't have been gold either.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT IT IS - What's interesting is the temperature of the stuff. It starts out above 1300°C when you see it beginning to pour down on screen. We can tell that temperature from the amount and color of the light it radiates. Why would anything in an office fire be heated to 1300°C plus? And we can assume as there is no source of fire hot enough immediately behind it (the closest visible fires are orange-red hot) it's going to have started a lot hotter before it finally reached the edge of the building.

Beachnut is now on ignore.

 

[GlennB]

..
P.S. Are you telling me you've been arguing about the whole thermate story without understanding how blackbody radiation works? I guess, only someone not familiar with the basics of blackbody radiation would!

And are you taking your "blackbody radiation" measurements from the apparent colour observed in a bunch of (camera) photos?

tsk tsk on you !

Now you will admit where you have gone wrong, I hope, in the advancement of all-round scientific enlightenment ??? No ??

 

[van_dutch]

It's time to chime in.....

If you don't know what it is, how can you certainly say that it is 1300C? I would like to see the calculations that you use to get this temperature. What wavelengths are being emitted? How much energy is being emitted? I agree that temperature can be determined from the amount and color of radiated light, but what values are you using for those? How have you obtained these values? Did you measure them from the video? Were you standing there measuring them? What is the limit of error on the instruments used to obtain these? If you are using a video, are you sure that it is an accurate representation in terms of brightness and color? Maybe your monitor was set in such a way that the video showed a different color/brightness than it actually was. If you are going to make a claim like this, I would certainly like to see the values of the necessary parameters and the equations in which they were plugged.

 

[1337m4n]

It's time to chime in.....

If you don't know what it is, how can you certainly say that it is 1300C? I would like to see the calculations that you use to get this temperature. What wavelengths are being emitted? How much energy is being emitted? I agree that temperature can be determined from the amount and color of radiated light, but what values are you using for those? How have you obtained these values? Did you measure them from the video? Were you standing there measuring them? What is the limit of error on the instruments used to obtain these? If you are using a video, are you sure that it is an accurate representation in terms of brightness and color? Maybe your monitor was set in such a way that the video showed a different color/brightness than it actually was. If you are going to make a claim like this, I would certainly like to see the values of the necessary parameters and the equations in which they were plugged.

Sorry but you will not get a coherent answer. Dabljuh does not provide evidence. He only makes claims and demands you to disprove them. He does not understand the concept of burden of proof. I will predict how he will respond to this post:

1) He will answer none of your questions.
2) He will demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of the concept of "burden of proof".
3) He will either place you on fake Ignore, or threaten to do so.

$100 says this is how he responds.

 

[van_dutch]

I removed this post because I didn't like what I had typed after I posted it. The post kind of turned into a dig at someone and not a post about the discussion at hand. As for 1337m4n, I have seen that trend, but I wanted to post anyways so I won't take your bet.

 

[Dabljuh]

If you don't know what it is, how can you certainly say that it is 1300C?

The lower bound for some of the glowing colors observed (yellow-whiteish) is the 1300°C range. It's an estimation. As with all observations, there is a margin of error. You are invited to add your own estimations. However, the margin of error is not big enough for you to be able to explain the discrepancy between the temperatures of macroscopic items heated by an office fire (realistically: 800°C tops, works out as cherry to orange) and the observed temperature (yellow-whitish) in the "molten metal" away.

 

[1337m4n]

The lower bound for some of the glowing colors observed (yellow-whiteish) is the 1300°C range. It's an estimation. As with all observations, there is a margin of error. You are invited to add your own estimations. However, the margin of error is not big enough for you to be able to explain the discrepancy between the temperatures of macroscopic items heated by an office fire (realistically: 800°C tops, works out to about orange) and the observed temperature (yellow-whitish) in the "molten metal" away.

Missed #3. You could've had $100, van dutch.

 

[1337m4n]

You're still on ignore

No he's not.

Do you want me to teach you what the Ignore feature is and how it works? All you have to do is ask.

 

[beachnut]

... which is why special heat-resistent steel is used in the construction of skyscrapers. ...

You lack knowledge on fire and come up with the dumbest ideas. I would like to see the special heat-resistant steel. Show me this steel that has a special property. Gee, then we can stop putting fire coatings on the steel; you have found new heat resistant steel. Wow. Typical truther lies or ignorance, which is your case?

Resistant, or you mean your new non-name, which does not exist. Did you spell it wrong, or does your steel have a special new name???

An ordinary office fire does weaken steel (what if I throw in 315 TONS of TNT heat energy, jet fuel), this is why we protect steel so people can get out of the building before it fails and kills them. But then you are not a fireman, or an engineer, you are a 9/11 truth believer, someone who has no evidence, just talks and makes up things.

6 years, you and 9/11 are the only ones who can’t figure out 9/11, even the terrorist know who did it, and some of them understand why the tower fell, they went to college! This leaves you and a few truthers behind most the world in knowledge when it comes to 9/11.

Fire did do it (do not forget the jet fuel and impacts), after big impacts 7 to 11 times the design impact studied by the chief structural engineer of the WTC towers. Even he understands how they failed. But you and 9/11 truth are still in total ignorance on the topic. Why?

Why waste time on color, when you have zero proof fire does not make building fail. Your lack of knowledge on firefighting alone is exposed by your failed conclusion, proven wrong on 9/11, 2001. What year is it now?

 

[WildCat]

The lower bound for some of the glowing colors observed (yellow-whiteish) is the 1300°C range.

Do you know the amount of ambient light available will skew the observed colors? The film or digital capture device in cameras? The settings of the camera? The settings of your computer monitor? Artifacts of digital compression? Programs used to edit the images?

How did you control for these things?

 

[van_dutch]

+1 to what WildCat said.

Where, Dabljuh, did you find that color-temperature scale? The ones I find put yellow/white at 2000F (about 1100C) and these are for steel. What if it wasn't steel, as some others pointed out? Different materials emit different colors at different temperatures. The type of material and the color at a given temperature are not independent.