WTC dust

[WTC Dust]

No, as the contents of the dust is not contaminated by an outside source, like cigarette butts, bum piss, and drunken peoples' puke. The stuff that is there, is supposed to be there.

Most of that looks to me like SFRM and loose (blown) insulation.

Looks like this stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-tJjPHoG6w

Start at 16 seconds.

I believe I've already told you that the lighter colored dust is a similar color to that, but a very different consistency.

 

[djlunacee]

I guess I'm just a complete failure in your eyes.

So far.

That hurts.

Truth hurts.

Does anybody here actually like me and think I'm funny?

I can only speak for myself when I say after seeing you blatantly laugh in posters faces who lost loved ones, friends and family in this very thread, I have no respect for you as a human being. dtugg saw the second plane with his own eyes, as did member foolmewunz, triforcharity was a first responder; he lost 341 of his brothers that day, Big Al lost a coworker, Ed Felt, on flight 93, my mother worked at the pentagon, there are many other stories in this forum as well.

So when you come on this board and make a mockery of what happened that day, make excuses for the 19 vermin that pulled this off, and piss over the memories of those that lost their lives that day, in search of a laugh how do you expect to be greeted?

In other words I have no respect for you. Do I find you funny? Not in the least, I find you to be nothing more than an attention seeking troll who will stop at nothing to be the center of attention, and I find it to be despicable.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[WTC Dust]

You're funny in a laughing in your face sort of way.

I'd have it no other way. Thanks.

 

[triforcharity]

I believe I've already told you that the lighter colored dust is a similar color to that, but a very different consistency.

Have you, oh, I dunno, TESTED it versus a control?

 

[alphahelix]

I guess I'm just a complete failure in your eyes. That hurts. Does anybody here actually like me and think I'm funny?

Here at the NWO we do have a sense of humor that we are aware of.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Light means anything within the visible spectrum.
In physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate with larger amplitude at some frequencies than at others.

Thanks for the science lesson. The thing about destroying something with resonance is that the thing you destroy has to co-operate. It has to resonate without damping down the oscillations. An opera singer may smash a wine glass with a top note, but she can't smash a coffee mug.

When people design large structures, they take lessons from failures in the past, and specifically avoid designs which allow undamped oscillations to build up.

 

[triforcharity]

So far.



Truth hurts.



I can only speak for myself when I say after seeing you blatantly laugh in posters faces who lost loved ones, friends and family in this very thread, I have no respect for you as a human being. dtugg saw the second plane with his own eyes, as did member foolmewunz, triforcharity was a first responder; he lost 341 of his brothers that day, Big Al lost a coworker, Ed Felt, on flight 93, my mother worked at the pentagon, there are many other stories in this forum as well.

So when you come on this board and make a mockery of what happened that day, make excuses for the 19 vermin that pulled this off, and piss over the memories of those that lost their lives that day, in search of a laugh how do you expect to be greeted?

In other words I have no respect for you. Do I find you funny? Not in the least, I find you to be nothing more than an attention seeking troll who will stop at nothing to be the center of attention, and I find it to be despicable.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I couldn't agree more.

Just as an aside, I lost 343 Brothers that day. Just 2 of them happened to be my best friends. Guys that I loved as much as my own family.

She is still disgusting IMO.

Carry on.

 

[jhunter1163]

WTCDust is entitled to the same civility as the rest of us. Please refrain from personal attacks.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163

 

[WTC Dust]

So far.



Truth hurts.



I can only speak for myself when I say after seeing you blatantly laugh in posters faces who lost loved ones, friends and family in this very thread, I have no respect for you as a human being. dtugg saw the second plane with his own eyes, as did member foolmewunz, triforcharity was a first responder; he lost 341 of his brothers that day, Big Al lost a coworker, Ed Felt, on flight 93, my mother worked at the pentagon, there are many other stories in this forum as well.

So when you come on this board and make a mockery of what happened that day, make excuses for the 19 vermin that pulled this off, and piss over the memories of those that lost their lives that day, in search of a laugh how do you expect to be greeted?

In other words I have no respect for you. Do I find you funny? Not in the least, I find you to be nothing more than an attention seeking troll who will stop at nothing to be the center of attention, and I find it to be despicable.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

I'm not the person who told you planes were hijacked on that day, and I can't account for the false words of other people. I have no idea what happened to the people who were supposed to be on the planes that day. I don't even study the planes, except in merest passing, and only then because of the damage seen at Ground Zero that is incompatible with an airplane crash.

Fire fighters died on that day, but they weren't inside an airplane. I'm not sure about the other people, because I can't account for everything in the world. I can just tell you that metallic foam somehow appeared in the WTC dust.

 

[triforcharity]

Thanks for the science lesson. The thing about destroying something with resonance is that the thing you destroy has to co-operate. It has to resonate without damping down the oscillations. An opera singer may smash a wine glass with a top note, but she can't smash a coffee mug.

When people design large structures, they take lessons from failures in the past, and specifically avoid designs which allow undamped oscillations to build up.

Galloping Gerdie?

 

[djlunacee]

WTCDust is entitled to the same civility as the rest of us. Please refrain from personal attacks.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163

I understand but she did ask the question, I just gave an honest answer.

 

[WTC Dust]

Thanks for the science lesson. The thing about destroying something with resonance is that the thing you destroy has to co-operate. It has to resonate without damping down the oscillations. An opera singer may smash a wine glass with a top note, but she can't smash a coffee mug.

When people design large structures, they take lessons from failures in the past, and specifically avoid designs which allow undamped oscillations to build up.

An interesting argument that is actually on topic. I know that engineers take oscillations into account when building large structures. But what if the resonance frequency isn't tuned to a large structure, rather it is tuned to the dense material that makes up the structure?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Galloping Gerdie?

That's the most obvious past failure I had in mind.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

An interesting argument that is actually on topic. I know that engineers take oscillations into account when building large structures. But what if the resonance frequency isn't tuned to a large structure, rather it is tuned to the dense material that makes up the structure?

OK. How about you get down to cases and indicate what sort of frequency you think was involved and how you think excitation at that frequency might be applied?

Edit to add, if you're thinking of electromagnetic excitation, it would probably be best to rule out all frequencies which steel items are ever exposed to, since steel is never observed to turn suddenly to dust. So you can eliminate vast sweeps of the electromagnetic spectrum from your enquiries straight away.

 

[excaza]

LASER Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation
MASER Microwave Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation
X-ray Lasers Stimulated Emission of Radiation in the X-ray spectrum

See a pattern, here? Light means anything within the visible spectrum. Microwaves are longer than light waves. X-rays are shorter than visible light.

Wiki: "resonance"
In physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate with larger amplitude at some frequencies than at others. These are known as the system's resonant frequencies. At these frequencies, even small periodic driving forces can produce large amplitude oscillations, because the system stores vibrational energy.

This means that your energy calculations are moot. If you select the right wavelength of energy, you can destroy anything with very little energy input, relative to the destruction. Tesla said he could destroy the Empire State Building with a 25 horsepower machine.

Check out the History Channel's "The Invisible Machine: Electromagnetic Warfare". http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4515534125267138757#

You left out the little detail where wavelength is inversely proportional to energy. This is why radios can't melt your face off.

 

[WTC Dust]

OK. How about you get down to cases and indicate what sort of frequency you think was involved and how you think excitation at that frequency might be applied?

Edit to add, if you're thinking of electromagnetic excitation, it would probably be best to rule out all frequencies which steel items are ever exposed to, since steel is never observed to turn suddenly to dust. So you can eliminate vast sweeps of the electromagnetic spectrum from your enquiries straight away.

I've been told that the natural resonance frequency of steel and other dense materials is 10^13 hertz, but I'm still figuring this part out. Any comments?

 

[WTC Dust]

You left out the little detail where wavelength is inversely proportional to energy. This is why radios can't melt your face off.

Yeah, but what we are talking about is AMPLIFIED radiation, and that can hurt. Microwave weapons are used as area denial devices, and are quite painful.

 

[excaza]

Yeah, but what we are talking about is AMPLIFIED radiation, and that can hurt. Microwave weapons are used as area denial devices, and are quite painful.

Go try and melt steel with a microwave, let us know how it goes.

 

[WTC Dust]

From wiki: materials science

"The major determinants of the structure of a material and thus of its properties are its constituent chemical elements and the way in which it has been processed into its final form."

This is why the folks who insist on mass composition above all else are missing the point. The structure of the atoms determines the property of a material as much as the elements that a material is made of.

If you have a foam-like object and determine that it is made up largely of iron, and this has been found in the WTC dust, wow! So it being iron ain't enough. It has to be iron foam, and it has to be found in the WTC dust to show that a plane crash did not destroy the WTC. Unless plane crashes generate metallic foam, which they don't.

 

[WTC Dust]

Go try and melt steel with a microwave, let us know how it goes.

It might not be the correct frequency, and it ain't me who says that steel was melted on 9/11. I say it was vibrated apart without excess heat.