A Thermite/Thermate Question

[GodisEnergy]

Right Thermite . This is what is needed to start with.

Firstly,

Calculate exactly which parts of the structure were required to be cut in order to collapse the building.

Calculate the total amount of thermite/thermate/marmite required to cut those sections.

Calculate the total amount of liquid iron (Fe) produced from powder (due to by the thermite reaction Fe2O3 + 2Al → 2Fe + Al2O3) assuming a certain thermite composition.

Calculate how much steel would have been melted due the actions of this liquid iron. (2400°C or there abouts).

Calculate the total mass and volume of liquid material. (Iron and steel)


This should be very, very, easy and straight forward to do. Show your working at each stage. If the "truth movement" can atleast come up with some figures then it's worth the exercise.

Ammount of thermite required to take down
towers according to debunkers=0kg

Therefore ammount of thermite used
X being ammount of thermite. X>0
Ammount of unexploded thermite found by steven jones = Xs>0
therefore thermite (at least) helped bring down towers.

Secondly , Casting iron into "sharp ' edges is possible ,although the photo doesnt show sharp edges.If you have liquid metal cooling in a confined space with sharp boundries you will get a straight shape.The chinese have been casting iron swords for millenium.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Ammount of thermite required to take down
towers according to debunkers=0kg

Therefore ammount of thermite used
X being ammount of thermite. X>0
Ammount of unexploded thermite found by steven jones = Xs>0
therefore thermite (at least) helped bring down towers.

And the goal posts sail out of the ballpark at lightning speed...

Secondly , Casting iron into "sharp ' edges is possible ,although the photo doesnt show sharp edges.If you have liquid metal cooling in a confined space with sharp boundries you will get a straight shape.The chinese have been casting iron swords for millenium.

somehow I think this works a bit differently inside a burning building than it does in ancient forging... serving apples & oranges?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Ammount of thermite required to take down
towers according to debunkers=0kg

Therefore ammount of thermite used
X being ammount of thermite. X>0
Ammount of unexploded thermite found by steven jones = Xs>0
therefore thermite (at least) helped bring down towers.

unexploded thermite? do you even know what thermite is?

on a related note, can i describe the milk in my fridge as "unexploded" too?

 

[Sunstealer]

Ammount of thermite required to take down
towers according to debunkers=0kg

Therefore ammount of thermite used
X being ammount of thermite. X>0
Ammount of unexploded thermite found by steven jones = Xs>0
therefore thermite (at least) helped bring down towers.

Secondly , Casting iron into "sharp ' edges is possible ,although the photo doesnt show sharp edges.If you have liquid metal cooling in a confined space with sharp boundries you will get a straight shape.The chinese have been casting iron swords for millenium.

Man that is the best laugh I've had in ages. I ask you and the rest of the truth movement to come up with the simplest of figures and you do back flips.

You are proposing thermite therfore it's up to you to do the maths. I am asking the simplest of questions. If you cannot even make a guestimate, even when making assumptions, which I'm more than willing to acknowledge and accept, then you haven't got a leg to stand on. I mean, come on, an A grade Chemistry degree student should be able to use mol(e)s and work out physical quantities in his sleep. This is pre-degree stuff here!

I love the way he is lecturing a metallurgist (me) who's had extensive experience with castings (Steel, Al, Mg, Ti alloys) yet makes the fundamental mistake about casting swords!! ROFLMAO. If you understood the difference between forging and casting of steel you'd know why swords aren't cast. Again more home work for you - look up the Iron-Carbon system (or phase diagram) and then understand Time-Temperature-Transformation curves (TTT curves).

"If you have liquid metal cooling in a confined space with sharp boundries you will get a straight shape." Wow I did not know this, amazing! /facepalm.

Again it shows your complete lack of understanding that you are indeed talking to someone who knows his stuff. It's my living and yet I never knew that liquid metal solidifies into the shape it's poured into! Damn, who'd a thunk it eh? The simple fact that I can see that this sample has NOT been cast due to it's surface texture and the blatant right angle.

However, there is a very simple method to determine whether that sample was once molten or cast as GiE thinks. Take a cross section and polish it to 1 micron, etch in 4% nital and show me the microstructure. Show me the cross section. I'd bet my house that it would show zero morphology supporting a once molten (liquid) piece of iron.

You might also like to know that I have a keen interest in the Katana or Samurai Sword and I'm well versed in it's manufacture and production history. I've a blacksmith friend who asks my advice when producing period armour and weaponry for display and re-enactment. In 2009 we are going to produce our first katana as a smithing/metallurgical investigation and we'll donate the end result to a university because it's now illegal to make or hold these items in the UK. I also have a small forge at which I produced a good few knives and short swords. All steel of course and none of them cast.

 

[GodisEnergy]

ok well im not sure if they did it to katanas,but the chinese were using these cast iron forges to make ploughs in 500bc.

Does it really matter how much was used?

as for the 40lb sample was from a larger sample i assume that it had to be cut from that larger sample

 

[Dave Rogers]

Ammount of thermite required to take down
towers according to debunkers=0kg

This is a classic example of the dishonesty of truthers. The conversation goes something like this:

Debunker: The towers fell as a result of fire and structural damage;
Truther: Fire can't cause a steel structure to collapse, so the conspirators must have used thermite.
Debunker: OK, if fire couldn't cause the collapse, then how much thermite would have been needed?
Truther: Well, since you say fire could cause the collapse, then there's no lower limit on the amount.
Debunker: [facepalm]

The point, GiE, that I'm trying to make here is that you don't support your line of argument by denying the validity of its major premise, and nobody with a functioning intellect could believe that you do. Therefore, your entire line of argument is dishonest; it's based on a major premise that has to be true some of the time and false for the rest of the time for your argument to be valid, and by alternately asserting and denying it you're admitting that you realise this.

Dave

 

[twinstead]

bazant ,greening and some scientists from nist

Yup. That's it. Out of all the experts in the world, only those hacks believe the official story. Time to take it home, gentlemen; we've lost.

 

[GodisEnergy]

This is a classic example of the dishonesty of truthers. The conversation goes something like this:

Debunker: The towers fell as a result of fire and structural damage;
Truther: Fire can't cause a steel structure to collapse, so the conspirators must have used thermite.
Debunker: OK, if fire couldn't cause the collapse, then how much thermite would have been needed?
Truther: Well, since you say fire could cause the collapse, then there's no lower limit on the amount.
Debunker: [facepalm]

The point, GiE, that I'm trying to make here is that you don't support your line of argument by denying the validity of its major premise, and nobody with a functioning intellect could believe that you do. Therefore, your entire line of argument is dishonest; it's based on a major premise that has to be true some of the time and false for the rest of the time for your argument to be valid, and by alternately asserting and denying it you're admitting that you realise this.

Dave

no heres a typical truther/debunker argument.
Truther- thermite was found in the rubble.
Debunker-thats impossible do you know you would need 100,000 tonnes of thermite to bring down the tower
truther- So then how did it collapse if there was no thermite !
debunker-

 

[JamesB]

Troofer CSI

Pathologist: Well, I can come to no other conclusion than the fact that this man died of a heart attack induced by arsenic poisoning. I suspect his wife.

Lab assistant: But doctor, the lab tests showed nothing but trace amounts of arsenic or any other poison, far too low to kill anyone, and the man was 64, overweight, with a known history of heart disease. How can you say he was poisoned?

Pathologist: So you admit that he could die without arsenic, huh?

Lab assistant: Uhh, yeah....

Pathologist: Well if he could die with no arsenic in his body, than obviously even a minute amount would be enough to kill him. I demand the wife be arrested!

lab assistant: (face palm)

 

[bio]

no heres a typical truther/debunker argument.
Truther- thermite was found in the rubble.
Debunker-thats impossible do you know you would need 100,000 tonnes of thermite to bring down the tower
truther- So then how did it collapse if there was no thermite !
debunker-

debunker- a big, big plane hit the building
truther- but only a few columns were injured by it (15 %)
debunker- hot, hot fire
truther- but the fire burned not long enough to weak the steel / no evidence of steel over 600 C
debunker-

 

[lapman]

Back to comparative analysis. Bio and GiE, can you provide even one example, before or since 9/11, where thermite created the phenomenon that was found under the piles? Hint: Thermite was used extensively in WWII.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

There was no thermite found in the rubble, GIE.

Bio: Be careful about extending Bechtel's statements about the temperature of the rubble piles too far. The article that mentioned their temperature readings came out and said "... temperatures ranging from 400⁰F to 2,800⁰F. It is unclear what the average temperature was, or how widely distributed the hottest parts were, but while the pile was indeed incredibly hot, it wasn't uniformly so.

And besides that, all of Mackey's arguments about thermite still stand. The speed of thermite's reaction invalidates the notion that it was responsible for the temperature of the rubble piles for the weeks it burned.

 

[lapman]

There was no thermite found in the rubble, GIE.

Bio: Be careful about extending Bechtel's statements about the temperature of the rubble piles too far. The article that mentioned their temperature readings came out and said "... temperatures ranging from 400⁰F to 2,800⁰F. It is unclear what the average temperature was, or how widely distributed the hottest parts were, but while the pile was indeed incredibly hot, it wasn't uniformly so.

And besides that, all of Mackey's arguments about thermite still stand. The speed of thermite's reaction invalidates the notion that it was responsible for the temperature of the rubble piles for the weeks it burned.

The whole "pools of molten metal" below the piles is a red herring anyway. People could have been skiing on them with asbestos skiis for all I care. This was after the collapse and it's another one of those "first time in history" moments.

 

[JamesB]

truther- but the fire burned not long enough to weak the steel / no evidence of steel over 600 C

David Ray Griffin mentioned this again the other day, that there was tons of molten steel, but yet there was no evidence that any of the steel exceeded 500 degrees. I guess being a truther allows you to hold 2 entirely contradictory ideas in your head at one time.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

debunker- a big, big plane hit the building
truther- but only a few columns were injured by it (15 %)

Which transfers a great deal of stress to other colums, and those stresses aren't necessarily in directions the column is designed to bear.

truther- but the fire burned not long enough to weak the steel / no evidence of steel over 600 C

That's simply incorrect. The fires did indeed burn long enough, and were indeed strong enough. I don't see how you are arbitrarily saying it wasn't long enough. That's a conclusion not based on any evidence.

Furthermore, your citing of the 600 degree determination isn't the whole story - that's only one location in the fire - but it doesn't matter. If you admit to that temperature, then you admit to the scenario that says the towers collapsed. Steel loses a great deal of it's weight bearing ability at 600 degrees C, not to mention that the structural elements begin to distort at that temperature.

Thermal expansion occurred as soon as steel temperatures began to rise; column shortening occurred when creep and plastic strains overcame thermal expansion strains, typically at temperatures greater than 500^oC to 600^oC with accompanying high stresses and durations of temperatures and stress levels.

That section of the NIST report goes on to describe in greater detail the thermal-induced distortions that were noted. The point is that even reaching 600 degrees C is dangerous to a structure. And if that segment that reached 600 degrees got that hot - remember, that measurement was taken on a piece on the periphery of the fire itself, not within the most involved zones (someone who recalls the NIST report better, please remind me, but wasn't the "600 degree" piece of steel actually one that was supporting the exterior facade? I simply don't remember...) - then why is it being used as the upper limit in your argument? When it wasn't involved in the hottest part of the fire to begin with?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

The whole "pools of molten metal" below the piles is a red herring anyway. People could have been skiing on them with asbestos skiis for all I care. This was after the collapse and it's another one of those "first time in history" moments.

Yes, true. I've made that exact argument myself before. Post collapse measurements prove nothing about pre-collapse conditions.

 

[Dave Rogers]

no heres a typical truther/debunker argument.
Truther- thermite was found in the rubble.
Debunker-thats impossible do you know you would need 100,000 tonnes of thermite to bring down the tower

Wrong.

Debunker- No, thermite wasn't found in the rubble. It's claimed that elements were found in the rubble that are present in thermite, but all these were present in the WTC structure any way. Therefore, there's no evidence of thermite. Apart from that, there is no known way of using thermite to sever a vertical column anywhere near the size of the WTC columns.

truther- So then how did it collapse if there was no thermite !
debunker-

That bit sounds pretty accurate, if the smiley is equivalent to a facepalm.

debunker- a big, big plane hit the building
truther- but only a few columns were injured by it (15 %)
debunker- hot, hot fire
truther- but the fire burned not long enough to weak the steel / no evidence of steel over 600 C
debunker-

Yes, a facepalm at that point may be appropriate, but someone suffering from a slightly lesser case of Debunker Fatigue Syndrome might point out that (a) putting aside completely baseless speculation by conspiracy theorists, the only rational analyses ever carried out indicate that the fire did burn long enough to weaken the steel to less than half its initial strength, and (b) evidence of steel temperatures was based on a paint analysis technique that had an upper limit of 250ºC, and was carried out on steel from floors outside the collapse initiation areas because all those in the collapse initiation area either couldn't be identified, or had no paint remaining, indicating that they'd been heated above 250ºC.

But by that point, the truther's attention span is long exceeded, because actually understanding reality takes longer than making up catchy soundbites.

Dave

 

[GodisEnergy]

Wrong.

Debunker- No, thermite wasn't found in the rubble. It's claimed that elements were found in the rubble that are present in thermite, but all these were present in the WTC structure any way. Therefore, there's no evidence of thermite. Apart from that, there is no known way of using thermite to sever a vertical column anywhere near the size of the WTC columns.



That bit sounds pretty accurate, if the smiley is equivalent to a facepalm.



Yes, a facepalm at that point may be appropriate, but someone suffering from a slightly lesser case of Debunker Fatigue Syndrome might point out that (a) putting aside completely baseless speculation by conspiracy theorists, the only rational analyses ever carried out indicate that the fire did burn long enough to weaken the steel to less than half its initial strength, and (b) evidence of steel temperatures was based on a paint analysis technique that had an upper limit of 250ºC, and was carried out on steel from floors outside the collapse initiation areas because all those in the collapse initiation area either couldn't be identified, or had no paint remaining, indicating that they'd been heated above 250ºC.

But by that point, the truther's attention span is long exceeded, because actually understanding reality takes longer than making up catchy soundbites.

Dave

 

[R.Mackey]

The above photograph does not even resemble thermite.

You have been duped, plain and simple.

 

[leftysergeant]

[qimg]http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo332/subedei11/a838_abolhassan_astaneh_2050081722-.jpg[/qimg]

I do not see what this image of a heated piece of steel is supposed to prove. There is no part of it that has been effected by thermite. It looks like something you would expect to find in a steel structure that collapsed due to fire or on a piece of steel that had sat for a week or two in a big trash dump fire.

[qimg]http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo332/subedei11/Slide146_PNG.jpg[/qimg]

The fudge brownie looks like a bit of the melted plastic that was on top of the meteorite. Is this in Jones' custody right now? Or is it just sitting in a museum somewhere, untested? Context means an awful lot in forensics.

[qimg]http://i389.photobucket.com/albums/oo332/subedei11/molten002sm.jpg[/qimg]

Again, we are missing context here. Where was this photo taken and how large is it? It looks like melted brass ran down some sort of conduit. If this was under WTC 6 it is not relevant. There SHOULD have been a lot of molten brass there. There were several million rounds of ammo in the building.

- RJ lee found molten molybdenum ,

Not a component of thermite. More likely source would be welding fume. Molydenum is found in many steel alloys.

vapourised lead,which temperature far exceed melting of steel.

Arcing batteries could produce that. There were, in case you were unaware of it, THOUSANDS of lead-acid batteries in the complex, fully charged, when their wires got crossed.