Invitation to Derek Johnson to discuss his ideas

[ElMondoHummus]

I think you could calculate a theoretical max temperature of a combustion from the starting temperature of the reactants, their heat density/capacity, and the energy released by the burning.

A office fire would of course be a bit more complicated than e.g. a propane blowtorch in atmospheric air.

The theoretical maximum temperature is extraordinarily high. We know from NCSTAR1-5E, the controlled tests of multiple burning workstations, that in one experiment the gas temperature actually spiked over 1400^oC and destroyed some of their sensors.

It is actually possible to get steel melting in this scenario, with no mythical nano-thermo-whatever at all. However, we expect episodes like this to be brief, and the actual amount of melted steel to be small to none.

"Ordinary" Class A fires are no joke.

I admit, what I'm about to point out doesn't tell us what the temperatures were inside the affected zones in towers before they fell. But as Ryan noted last year, the rubble pile temps were measured via the AVARIS platform, and were recorded to be up to 1300^oF in some areas.

Yes, I do understand that if Ryan is talking about the workstation fires, he's discussing the pre-collapse temperatures. On top of that, Toke's point was probably the same, which would be what office fire temperatures reach. That, after all, is part of the truther argument i.e. regular office fires are not supposed to burn hot enough to melt steel, therefore some additional agent is needed. However, the "melting" effects that Astaneh-Asl and Barnett get quoted on (and that truthers hijack) have ultimately been determined to have occurred in the rubble piles, not inside the standing towers. So in the context of what affected the steel, it's arguably on topic to discuss what rubble pile temperatures were since that's what lead to the eutectic corrosions both men noticed.

And no, it doesn't appear hot enough to have rendered steel molten. Then again, the components they saw were never molten to begin with. Biederman and Sisson's studies, in conjunction with Barnett's work proves that.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I think one of the possibilities they are implying is that the temperatures got so high from the thermite that it took weeks to cool to molten levels.

I think if things got that hot, we'd have had a "China syndrome" scenario.

And a very very large ingot of steel......

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Often within this thread it has been accurately pointed out that the existence of molten steel would require the removal of left-over hardened steel pools. Since there is no mention of the removal of such things in any supporting documents(according to you), the case against molten steel is strengthened.

It has also been mentioned several times that what was misidentified as molten steel could have been molten metals of lower melting points such as aluminum.

Is there any record of the removal of solidified pools of these metals?

Also, is Derek's description of the heat conductivity levels used by NIST vs the real values accurate? It's been quoted a couple times, but not yet addressed. Did NIST use fair values?

Where's Bill Smith and the grand unification theory promised 20 pages ago??

 

[Oystein]

I wonder if Derek has sent out the newsletter to all his engineers as he presented it here, including the molten-steel part?

If so, that would have been a very unfortunate case of one man lying to many...

 

[TruthersLie]

Often within this thread it has been accurately pointed out that the existence of molten steel would require the removal of left-over hardened steel pools. Since there is no mention of the removal of such things in any supporting documents(according to you), the case against molten steel is strengthened.

It has also been mentioned several times that what was misidentified as molten steel could have been molten metals of lower melting points such as aluminum.

Is there any record of the removal of solidified pools of these metals?

Also, is Derek's description of the heat conductivity levels used by NIST vs the real values accurate? It's been quoted a couple times, but not yet addressed. Did NIST use fair values?

Where's Bill Smith and the grand unification theory promised 20 pages ago??

I know that molten aluminum was found and removed from the debris (they have some of it at the 911 memorial).

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I know that molten aluminum was found and removed from the debris (they have some of it at the 911 memorial).

One has to be carefull what one says around truthers.....you mean previously molten aluminium was found. Otherwise they will be quoting you in their next fantasy.

 

[TruthersLie]

Yes.

You are correct.

There was previously (from the fires in the debris) molten aluminum which was found in the pile.

And I have had the honor of having P'doh datamine my statement at DBS... that is ok, I returned the favor.

 

[DGM]

I wonder if Derek has sent out the newsletter to all his engineers as he presented it here, including the molten-steel part?

If so, that would have been a very unfortunate case of one man lying to many...

So far he hasn't done anything. In his post he seems to be addressing his members but, a look at it's web site shows the last "news letter" (that was not "woo" in the least) was in October.

http://www.tspe.org/About/Chapters/LocalChapters/CentralTexasChapter/tabid/93/Default.aspx

Maybe he doesn't want his members to know about this after all.

 

[apathoid]

So far he hasn't done anything. In his post he seems to be addressing his members but, a look at it's web site shows the last "news letter" (that was not "woo" in the least) was in October.

http://www.tspe.org/About/Chapters/LocalChapters/CentralTexasChapter/tabid/93/Default.aspx

Maybe he doesn't want his members to know about this after all.

It actually says a lot about the TSPE that they have a truther as President of one of their chapters. Either way, their being unaware of Derek's extra-curricular activities; or knowing about them and not caring, speaks volumes about their credibility. Are there any TSPE members here? rwgwinn? My brother-in-law is an ASME member and works as a PE in Texas. I guess I'll have to have a little chat with him. My prediction is that he's never heard of TSPE.

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Yes.

You are correct.

There was previously (from the fires in the debris) molten aluminum which was found in the pile.

And I have had the honor of having P'doh datamine my statement at DBS... that is ok, I returned the favor.

I'm a little confused; but that occurs early and often with truthers...

If the fires in the debris caused different metals (ie. not steel) to become molten, and then solidify once cooled, then there would be large 'pools' of molten aluminum. Is there any documentation to support the discovery and removal of large previously-molten metals?

Also, isn't the skeptics explanation for the "molten metal" which 'poured' out of the tower pre-collapse that it is Al (as in, melted before the collapse)?

Finally, you've all been quite clear about your opinion of Derek Johnson; what about his statement concerning the values NIST used for the thermal conductivity of steel?

 

[Edx]

If the fires in the debris caused different metals (ie. not steel) to become molten, and then solidify once cooled, then there would be large 'pools' of molten aluminum. Is there any documentation to support the discovery and removal of large previously-molten metals?

The molten metal issue is stupid anyway since the same anecdotal evidence they use to claim its existence for WTC1,2 and 7 is also there for WTC6 as well where it is described as red hot and running down the walls.

At the end of the day nothing truthers have come up with explains this better than it just being other metals, oh sure they talk about thermite and since thermite melts steel I guess they think its good enough to stop thinking there. But as has been said over and over again, thermite can't account for tons of molten steel truthers claim existed. The simplest explanation then is that it wasn't steel and thermite did not have any role in it.

 

[ImANiceGuy]

The molten metal issue is stupid anyway since the same anecdotal evidence they use to claim its existence for WTC1,2 and 7 is also there for WTC6 as well where it is described as red hot and running down the walls.

At the end of the day nothing truthers have come up with explains this better than it just being other metals, oh sure they talk about thermite and since thermite melts steel I guess they think its good enough to stop thinking there. But as has been said over and over again, thermite can't account for tons of molten steel truthers claim existed. The simplest explanation then is that it wasn't steel and thermite did not have any role in it.

Not to be rude EDX, but you did not address either of my questions, and I feel as though they are fair questions given the skeptics responses to claims of molten metals.

 

[Oystein]

I'm a little confused; but that occurs early and often with truthers...

If the fires in the debris caused different metals (ie. not steel) to become molten, and then solidify once cooled, then there would be large 'pools' of molten aluminum. Is there any documentation to support the discovery and removal of large previously-molten metals?

Also, isn't the skeptics explanation for the "molten metal" which 'poured' out of the tower pre-collapse that it is Al (as in, melted before the collapse)?

Finally, you've all been quite clear about your opinion of Derek Johnson; what about his statement concerning the values NIST used for the thermal conductivity of steel?

I think you are not wording the first question fairly. The image of "lakes" of molten (then solidified) steel came as a response to the truly ridiculous claims of "rivers" of molten steel.
TruthersLie claims that previously molten metals other than steel were found - he did not say large, and we see no reason why any such pools ought to "large".
So you should have only asked: "Is there any documentation to support the discovery and removal of large previously-molten metals?", and that answer was already given in the affirmative in the post you quoted. You really should ask: Can you show me any such documentation?

About the thermal conductivity of steel, I can't help out there.

 

[Edx]

Not to be rude EDX, but you did not address either of my questions, and I feel as though they are fair questions given the skeptics responses to claims of molten metals.

I'm telling you its a stupid irrelevant point in the first place!

I only see one question really and the point is that either there was molten metal or there wasn't. Maybe the various anecdotes are exaggerated, but IF THERE WAS then it is not evidence of any inside job. So regarding your question, the fact is that truthers claim there were tons of molten steel, so where's THEIR evidence for it?

Like I said there were reports of flowing molten metal and red hot metal in WTC6 as well. So what relevance could this molten metal have?

 

[TruthersLie]

I'm a little confused; but that occurs early and often with truthers...

If the fires in the debris caused different metals (ie. not steel) to become molten, and then solidify once cooled, then there would be large 'pools' of molten aluminum. Is there any documentation to support the discovery and removal of large previously-molten metals?

move them goal posts much?

you asked about any found and recoverd molten metals. I pointed out that there was some formerly molten but cooled aluminum which was recovered and put on display.

Gravy has it listed on one of his pages.

Also, isn't the skeptics explanation for the "molten metal" which 'poured' out of the tower pre-collapse that it is Al (as in, melted before the collapse)?

No.

it is one possible explanation for the molten metal. I can name 10 metals which would be molten in 1100 C fires.

It is also possible the molten "materials" was molten glass... or even possible plastics.

Finally, you've all been quite clear about your opinion of Derek Johnson; what about his statement concerning the values NIST used for the thermal conductivity of steel?

I am not qualified to stay... but I do hope that when he goes for his license someone points out his truther activism and slander of the NIST engineers to his licensing board.

 

[aggle-rithm]

it is one possible explanation for the molten metal. I can name 10 metals which would be molten in 1100 C fires.

It is also possible the molten "materials" was molten glass... or even possible plastics.

Salt is another possibility. In fact, there are so many that it is doubtful that any molten materials seen would have contained only one substance. Everything capable of melting would have been directed by gravity to the same place.

 

[ImANiceGuy]

I'm telling you its a stupid irrelevant point in the first place!
Like I said there were reports of flowing molten metal and red hot metal in WTC6 as well. So what relevance could this molten metal have?

I do not immediately accept things that are told to me, I prefer to come to my own conclusions. If you think I'll cease my line of questioning based upon your opening statement, you might want to reconsider.

The relevance of molten metal/steel is that it could possibly be evidence of additional incendiary used in addition to the plane crashes to collapse the towers.

 

[ImANiceGuy]

move them goal posts much?

What does this even mean in the context of my post? You can't just throw this saying around when you hear something that you don't agree with...

We would have to have first set the goalposts in order to move them right?

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Salt is another possibility. In fact, there are so many that it is doubtful that any molten materials seen would have contained only one substance. Everything capable of melting would have been directed by gravity to the same place.

Sorry for triple post...

Doesn't this support the idea that large pools of previously molten materials should have been found? Do the "meteorites" count as such?

 

[BigAl]

I do not immediately accept things that are told to me, I prefer to come to my own conclusions. If you think I'll cease my line of questioning based upon your opening statement, you might want to reconsider.

The relevance of molten metal/steel is that it could possibly be evidence of additional incendiary used in addition to the plane crashes to collapse the towers.

People like you have had 9 years to explain why. So far nobody has.