WTC dust

[Alferd_Packer]

The coefficient of thermal expansion of metallic foam is inconsistent with the beam absorption rate of your typical DEW.

nice

 

[bill smith]

Be careful, Judy believes it was a space beam, Dusty carefully avoids agreeing with that.

Personally I am perfectly willing to consider an exotic weapon. A person would have to be stupid not to given the extent of American research, it's vast budget and the stolen Tesla technology that they have.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Personally I am perfectly willing to consider an exotic weapon. A person would have to be stupid not to given the extent of American research, it's vast budget and the stolen Tesla technology that they have.

I think I see your problem here, Bill.

 

[WTC Dust]

How much energy?

I don't have an exact value for several reasons.

You can think about this issue in two different directions, from the perspective of what happened to the WTC buildings (and others in the area) or from the perspective of the power coming from a weapon.

First, the building contents were not accurately sampled. Much of the building went up into the sky, never to be collected. So no matter how much dust I find, I will not be able to do a stoichiometric accounting of the building contents.

Also, there is reason to suspect that other buildings were partially involved. Many buildings in the surrounding area were damaged, and I don't have precise figures on that or their specific contributions to the dust.

Another unknown is the technical aspect of the weapon methodology. The specific frequency and amplitude are not known. So I can't begin to calculate from the "other direction", namely the power source itself.

Some things might be said about the dust itself, when I get further along in the analysis. Perhaps, what energy does it take to vibrate solid steel into X-sized particles? is a question that can be asked.

 

[bill smith]

I think I see your problem here, Bill.

"So powerful are the effects of the telegeodynamic oscillator", said Tesla in reviewing the subject in the thirties, "that I could go over to the Empire State Building and reduce it to a tangled mass of wreckage in a very short time. I could accomplish this result with utmost certainty and without any difficulty whatever. I would use a small mechanical vibrating device, an engine so small you could slip it in your pocket. I could attach it to any part of the building, start it in operation, allow it twelve or thirteen minutes to come to full resonance. The building would first respond with gentle tremors, and the vibrations would then become so powerful that the whole structure would go into resonant oscillations of such great amplitude and power
that the rivets in the steel beams would be loosened and sheared. The outer stone coating would be thrown off and then the skeleton steel structure would collapse in all its parts. It would take about 2.5 horsepower to drive the oscillator to produce this effect''

Am I joking Alfred or is this an accurate quote ? If it is do you have any comment ?

 

[Newtons Bit]

I know that if you vibrate a boeing aircraft frame through 2,000 cycles per second it will fly apart.

No it won't. But I'll go ahead and ask you for a source anyways.

How many cycles per second is your ten to the power of 12 ?

10^12

It's the same frequency as infrared light. Which, as you probably know, doesn't cause steel to dustify.

You should know by now that I never entirely reject any possibilty to do with 9/11 Newton.

Except the planes, of course.

 

[WTC Dust]

How is the energy attenuated so that you get discrete particles of the steel beam instead of complete vaporization of the steel?

I think the destruction came from either an increased radiant energy from a directed power source OR from a specific manipulation of the electromagnetic fields surrounding the WTC.

Either way, I believe the attractive Casimir force was overcome by the increased radiant energy OR turned from a positive (attractive) to a negative (repulsive) value by the change in the electromagnetic field.

Either way, I claim that the steel vibrated apart without excess heat and became a heterogeneous foam.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

"So powerful are the effects of the telegeodynamic oscillator", said Tesla in reviewing the subject in the thirties, "that I could go over to the Empire State Building and reduce it to a tangled mass of wreckage in a very short time. I could accomplish this result with utmost certainty and without any difficulty whatever. I would use a small mechanical vibrating device, an engine so small you could slip it in your pocket. I could attach it to any part of the building, start it in operation, allow it twelve or thirteen minutes to come to full resonance. The building would first respond with gentle tremors, and the vibrations would then become so powerful that the whole structure would go into resonant oscillations of such great amplitude and power
that the rivets in the steel beams would be loosened and sheared. The outer stone coating would be thrown off and then the skeleton steel structure would collapse in all its parts. It would take about 2.5 horsepower to drive the oscillator to produce this effect''

Am I joking Alfred or is this an accurate quote ? If it is do you have any comment ?

The ravings of a mentally disturbed person do not prove anything.

Besides, were those the effects that were observed on 9/1?

 

[WTC Dust]

Probably the best troll I've seen in a while. Kudos.

Either that, or what I say about my results is true and I actually intend to do the seminar on December 1st.

Just asking, has any troll dropped by JREF for a while and then put a public seminar on the JREF calender to more fully expose their data to JREF scrutiny? I'm guessing it might be a first.

 

[WTC Dust]

Be careful, Judy believes it was a space beam, Dusty carefully avoids agreeing with that.

field effects =/= space beams

Dr. Wood talks about field effects.
She doesn't talk about space beams.

She does mention that the funding probably came from the Star Wars Defense Initiative, but Ronald Reagan came up with that name, not Dr. Wood.

 

[bill smith]

No it won't. But I'll go ahead and ask you for a source anyways.



10^12

It's the same frequency as infrared light. Which, as you probably know, doesn't cause steel to dustify.



Except the planes, of course.

This was the link but as we all know there is a an ongoing Google purge of 9/11 videos. If you look you may find it out there somewhere.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=18HqbZf440w&NR=1 Jeff hill/lead engineer boeing

 

[bill smith]

The ravings of a mentally disturbed person do not prove anything.

Besides, were those the effects that were observed on 9/1?

Yes Alfred...they are all mad.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

I think the destruction came from either an increased radiant energy from a directed power source OR from a specific manipulation of the electromagnetic fields surrounding the WTC.

Either way, I believe the attractive Casimir force was overcome by the increased radiant energy OR turned from a positive (attractive) to a negative (repulsive) value by the change in the electromagnetic field.

Either way, I claim that the steel vibrated apart without excess heat and became a heterogeneous foam.

Nice bit of B.S.

It of course means nothing.

 

[WTC Dust]

The coefficient of thermal expansion of metallic foam is inconsistent with the beam absorption rate of your typical DEW.

Don't get confused. I specifically deny thermal expansion as the mechanism of destruction of the WTC.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Either way, I claim that the steel vibrated apart without excess heat and became a heterogeneous foam.

Let's take a look at this claim, then shall we.

the standard definition for the word "Foam" is a collection of bubbles. or, if you will, a framework of solid material surrounding gas-filled voids (bubbles).

What is the gas in the bubbles in your heterogeneous foam?

 

[WTC Dust]

but building collapses can.

Metallic foam, from gravity? WEEOOWEEOOWEEOO! Alarms going off.

 

[bill smith]

Either that, or what I say about my results is true and I actually intend to do the seminar on December 1st.

Just asking, has any troll dropped by JREF for a while and then put a public seminar on the JREF calender to more fully expose their data to JREF scrutiny? I'm guessing it might be a first.

How would you interpret what Tesla meant with this word:-

telegeodynamic

 

[WTC Dust]

Do you understand that the "unique smell" at ground zero was composed of organic molecules, not steel dust?

Ooh, baby DOLL! You're talking to the expert when it comes to organic molecules. I'm a biomedical scientist, by training. I know what organic molecules smell like, and there were some of those smells in the early days.

But the organic smells went away while the other stench remained strong for months.

 

[Newtons Bit]

The ravings of a mentally disturbed person do not prove anything.

Besides, were those the effects that were observed on 9/1?

It also wouldn't do anything. Buildings aren't homogeneous objects. They don't have a single natural frequency that will result in resonance when excited by a tiny force. One mode might excite, but another mode will damp.

 

[Sabrina]

So how do you account for the hundreds of eyewitnesses, both at the WTC and the Pentagon and in Shanksville who all saw PLANES either fly into the buildings or crash into the ground?

And I'm not talking about the people who saw it on TV; I'm talking about the people who were physically THERE, on site, and who all described planes in their eyewitness testimony. You said in another thread you'd accept eyewitness testimony as evidence of hijackings; there are literally hundreds of witnesses to the planes hitting the buildings and crashing in the field. After the first plane hit, nearly everyone in downtown Manhattan was staring on an almost constant basis at the WTC complex, from varying distances. I have yet to hear of one who denied having seen an airplane that was in line of sight of the airplane's trajectory as it plowed into the South Tower. As for witnesses to the first plane; do you discount the word of several reputable first responders who actually SAW it happen? Watch the Naudet documentary; it contains footage of the very real plane smashing into a tower and the firefighters' reactions to it. And if you handwave away the video, then I suggest you go and actually SPEAK to the firefighters who witnessed it; I can't recall the ladder number offhand, but I'm sure someone here can remember it, as well as the names of the firefighters in question. I'm pretty sure they'll tell you they saw a PLANE hit the towers.