Little to no steel melted.
1. If steel had melted, there would be a huge number of columns that transition from solid box columns or I beams to slumps of previously-molten, re-solidified misshapen plates of steel jutting out at bizarre angles (i.e., gravitationally "flat" according to whatever orientation the melted column stood when it melted.)
Approximately zero such beams were found. I've never seen a single one.
Ergo, little to no steel melted.
Until you can show me one such beam, my best estimate is that zero steel melted.
2. If steel had melted, there would be many-thousand-ton lakes of resolidified solid steel ingots with massive inclusions of all kinds of debris.
None was found.
Ergo, little to no steel melted.
3. That meteorite, that the "expert" (actually the curator of the 9/11 museum, probably an arts major) claims was "molten steel" is proven to never have been molten by the still legible pieces of paper and wooden pieces embedded in it.
Ergo, it was never molten steel.
Ergo, even eye-witness "experts" close to the case can be 100% wrong.
4. If it was hot enough to melt steel, then it would have melted every otter common metal with a lower melting temp. There would also have been no un-combusted paper. From the images I've seen of the debris at Fresh Kills, there was a huge amount of both paper & unmelted copper, brass, aluminum, etc.
Ergo, little to no steel melted.
Re: Dr. Gross
Gross is right. You are wrong. Laughably wrong. Kicking your little hands & feet & holding your breath until you turn blue wrong. In public.
Gross knows that there were no "pools of molten steel" below the towers. This is far from the first time that he's heard this nonsense from a bunch of fools (who think that particle physicists know more about these issues than structural engineers). That is precisely why he smirks.
Just exactly the same way that any experienced engineer would smirk at you, Derek. Oh, not at first. They'd start to explain where you are going off the track at first. But pretty damn soon, faced with your ignorance, arrogance, incompetence at seeing the big picture and insulting manner, they'd have some pretty full-blown smirks in a fairly short while.
Pretty much like I do every time I read one of your clueless posts.
This is very simple, Derek. There was little to no molten steel. There was almost certainly molten aluminum, lead, tin. Possibly copper, brass & bronze.
___
Your invocation of a comparison between the radiant heat effects of a 9" cupola of melted steel to "rivers of molten steel" proves that your engineering skills are woefully inadequate with respect to the difference between temperature & heat.
If air is such a good insulator, please explain how a forest fire can radiate enough heat to cause trees 100 or more feet away to burst into flames, thereby crossing roads, freeways & fire breaks. Please explain why fire fighters are killed in forest fires, when they can easily find many clearings that are 25, 50, 100 feet or more away from actively burning trees.
And then tell me again about your 9" cupola...
Finally, there is precisely zero evidence of any melted steel prior to collapse.
"Melted steel" that happened in the rubble pile has precisely zero bearing on the cause of the collapse. Cause precedes effect.
Learn to read & understand.
No STEEL was liquified.
Iron oxide is not steel.
Iron sulfide is not steel.
The eutectic combination of iron-oxide & iron-sulfide is not steel.
The eutectic combo of Fe-O & Fe-S melts at around 980°F.
980°F is NOT hot enough to melt steel.
Steel melts between 2200°F & 2800°F. This piece of material never came close to those temperatures. It was NOT HOT ENOUGH to melt steel. As proven by the fact that there is lots of steel remaining in these samples that - Duh! - did not melt.
980°F IS hot enough to melt lots of other metals.
Once again, you are - stupidly - holding up the very proof that the temps got very hot (at least 1000°F, but not up to 2200°F, JUST EXACTLY the temps that you'd expect in a huge underground fire with lots of fuel) and claiming … nothing.
You're merely JAQin' off in public.
___
All of the above is true in precisely the same way that steel does not fall apart if scraped with your fingernail. It is much stronger than that.
But material on the bottom & sides of an old car that was PREVIOUSLY steel, and is now iron oxide (by virtue of its exposure to salt water), and is now called rust, DOES fall apart when scratched by your fingernail.
Chemistry changes the physical properties of metals. High temperature VASTLY increases the rates at which these reactions happen.
There is zero mystery here.
See above regarding Dr. Gross.
The smirking Dr. Gross is right, Derek. You are hopelessly lost.
Re: the fireman.
The fireman is telling an interesting story. A story that he does not even claim is his own.
He did NOT say "I saw …" He says "YOU get down below and YOU see…" For all you know, he is simply retelling his version of something he heard 4th hand.
If anyone has some of this guy's (I've heard his name is "Philip Ruvolo") additional comments which might elaborate, I'd be interested in reading them.
Somebody saw something. (Maybe.)
What this fireman says is PROVABLY false.
Molten steel running down steel rails results in melted rails (in a very short time) and no more molten steel running down steel rails.
Ergo, something is incorrect in his statement.
"Working in a foundry", Derek, you should know this. You do NOT melt steel in steel containers.
tom
1. If steel had melted, there would be a huge number of columns that transition from solid box columns or I beams to slumps of previously-molten, re-solidified misshapen plates of steel jutting out at bizarre angles (i.e., gravitationally "flat" according to whatever orientation the melted column stood when it melted.)
Approximately zero such beams were found. I've never seen a single one.
Ergo, little to no steel melted.
Until you can show me one such beam, my best estimate is that zero steel melted.
2. If steel had melted, there would be many-thousand-ton lakes of resolidified solid steel ingots with massive inclusions of all kinds of debris.
None was found.
Ergo, little to no steel melted.
3. That meteorite, that the "expert" (actually the curator of the 9/11 museum, probably an arts major) claims was "molten steel" is proven to never have been molten by the still legible pieces of paper and wooden pieces embedded in it.
Ergo, it was never molten steel.
Ergo, even eye-witness "experts" close to the case can be 100% wrong.
4. If it was hot enough to melt steel, then it would have melted every otter common metal with a lower melting temp. There would also have been no un-combusted paper. From the images I've seen of the debris at Fresh Kills, there was a huge amount of both paper & unmelted copper, brass, aluminum, etc.
Ergo, little to no steel melted.
Re: Dr. Gross
Gross is right. You are wrong. Laughably wrong. Kicking your little hands & feet & holding your breath until you turn blue wrong. In public.
Gross knows that there were no "pools of molten steel" below the towers. This is far from the first time that he's heard this nonsense from a bunch of fools (who think that particle physicists know more about these issues than structural engineers). That is precisely why he smirks.
Just exactly the same way that any experienced engineer would smirk at you, Derek. Oh, not at first. They'd start to explain where you are going off the track at first. But pretty damn soon, faced with your ignorance, arrogance, incompetence at seeing the big picture and insulting manner, they'd have some pretty full-blown smirks in a fairly short while.
Pretty much like I do every time I read one of your clueless posts.
This is very simple, Derek. There was little to no molten steel. There was almost certainly molten aluminum, lead, tin. Possibly copper, brass & bronze.
___
Your invocation of a comparison between the radiant heat effects of a 9" cupola of melted steel to "rivers of molten steel" proves that your engineering skills are woefully inadequate with respect to the difference between temperature & heat.
If air is such a good insulator, please explain how a forest fire can radiate enough heat to cause trees 100 or more feet away to burst into flames, thereby crossing roads, freeways & fire breaks. Please explain why fire fighters are killed in forest fires, when they can easily find many clearings that are 25, 50, 100 feet or more away from actively burning trees.
And then tell me again about your 9" cupola...
Finally, there is precisely zero evidence of any melted steel prior to collapse.
"Melted steel" that happened in the rubble pile has precisely zero bearing on the cause of the collapse. Cause precedes effect.
Learn to read & understand.
No STEEL was liquified.
Iron oxide is not steel.
Iron sulfide is not steel.
The eutectic combination of iron-oxide & iron-sulfide is not steel.
The eutectic combo of Fe-O & Fe-S melts at around 980°F.
980°F is NOT hot enough to melt steel.
Steel melts between 2200°F & 2800°F. This piece of material never came close to those temperatures. It was NOT HOT ENOUGH to melt steel. As proven by the fact that there is lots of steel remaining in these samples that - Duh! - did not melt.
980°F IS hot enough to melt lots of other metals.
Once again, you are - stupidly - holding up the very proof that the temps got very hot (at least 1000°F, but not up to 2200°F, JUST EXACTLY the temps that you'd expect in a huge underground fire with lots of fuel) and claiming … nothing.
You're merely JAQin' off in public.
___
All of the above is true in precisely the same way that steel does not fall apart if scraped with your fingernail. It is much stronger than that.
But material on the bottom & sides of an old car that was PREVIOUSLY steel, and is now iron oxide (by virtue of its exposure to salt water), and is now called rust, DOES fall apart when scratched by your fingernail.
Chemistry changes the physical properties of metals. High temperature VASTLY increases the rates at which these reactions happen.
There is zero mystery here.
See above regarding Dr. Gross.
The smirking Dr. Gross is right, Derek. You are hopelessly lost.
Re: the fireman.
The fireman is telling an interesting story. A story that he does not even claim is his own.
He did NOT say "I saw …" He says "YOU get down below and YOU see…" For all you know, he is simply retelling his version of something he heard 4th hand.
If anyone has some of this guy's (I've heard his name is "Philip Ruvolo") additional comments which might elaborate, I'd be interested in reading them.
Somebody saw something. (Maybe.)
What this fireman says is PROVABLY false.
Molten steel running down steel rails results in melted rails (in a very short time) and no more molten steel running down steel rails.
Ergo, something is incorrect in his statement.
"Working in a foundry", Derek, you should know this. You do NOT melt steel in steel containers.
tom
