Merged Molten metal observations

DGM said:
Only if the water hits the fire directly. Ever hear of steam? You need to think out-side your box (if your handlers will permit).

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yea heard of steam. But you're still a long shot from pure free sulfur. Carry on.
 
DGM said:
Let's see...........there's fire and then the firefighters put water on it.

You didn't actually read (we know you didn't understand) the WPI article, did you?
Click to expand...
he is not using chemistry, he is using delusions from 911 truth. He has no clue sulfur dioxide comes from the fires at the WTC.

He has to ignore the fires from the WTC can have the following great things. Inorganic acidic compounds due to chlorine and fluorine in the tires, plastics and other stuff from the WTC, including hydrochloric acid (HCl ) and hydrofluoric acid (HF). Acidic sulfur compounds from sulfur in the tires and other WTC junk, including sulfur dioxide (SO2), sulfuric acid (H2SO4), sulfurous acid (H2SO3) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) which forms sulfuric acid on contact with water or atmospheric water vapor. Acidic nitrogen compounds due to combustion with excess air including but not limited to nitric acid (HNO3) and nitrous acid (HNO2).
 
DGM said:
No.............really?


:)






;)
Click to expand...
The only reality based stuff he posted is a reference to Cartoon Network.

I think he agreed that thermite did not cause the corrosion on the steel, now he is learning chemical engineering at a rate commensurate with 911 truth's rate of finding evidence.
 
beachnut said:
The only reality based stuff he posted is a reference to Cartoon Network.

I think he agreed that thermite did not cause the corrosion on the steel, now he is learning chemical engineering at a rate commensurate with 911 truth's rate of finding evidence.
Click to expand...
I hope he's young. At that rate...................................

:rolleyes:
 
beachnut said:
The only reality based stuff he posted is a reference to Cartoon Network.

I think he agreed that thermite did not cause the corrosion on the steel, now he is learning chemical engineering at a rate commensurate with 911 truth's rate of finding evidence.
Click to expand...

I doubt that any-one is capable of that level of 'unlearning'
 
beachnut said:
he is not using chemistry, he is using delusions from 911 truth. He has no clue sulfur dioxide comes from the fires at the WTC.

He has to ignore the fires from the WTC can have the following great things. Inorganic acidic compounds due to chlorine and fluorine in the tires, plastics and other stuff from the WTC, including hydrochloric acid (HCl ) and hydrofluoric acid (HF). Acidic sulfur compounds from sulfur in the tires and other WTC junk, including sulfur dioxide (SO2), sulfuric acid (H2SO4), sulfurous acid (H2SO3) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) which forms sulfuric acid on contact with water or atmospheric water vapor. Acidic nitrogen compounds due to combustion with excess air including but not limited to nitric acid (HNO3) and nitrous acid (HNO2).
Click to expand...

Just quoting this so he can see it. I think he claimed u were on his ignore list.
 
Java Man said:
Yea, but you see for one reaction to take place there has to be no water. The heat needs to dehydrate the gypsum and then something needs to take the SO4 away and then some other processes need to occur to free the S and all of that in sufficient amounts to affect the beam.
Click to expand...
There is no need to free the S from gases such as SO2, H2S etc because the corrosion mechanism is one of solid state difffusion whereby S2 and O2 diffuse into the steel's surface. Liberation of Sulphur containing gases from the wallboard has already been shown to be true.

Even Christophera7 to his credit has finally acknowledged that this is true.

CaSO4 + SiO2 --> CaSiO2 + SO2 will occur at 900°C. Drywall will contain upto 10% SiO2. This reaction occurs due to heat only, no external O2 is required.

http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/60/8/1418.full.pdf

There are other reactions that will liberate SO2. Why do I feel that we are going over ground that has been covered in the "Gage's next debate" thread.

P.S. Oh and the bolded above indicates your level of chemistry knowledge - it's wrong.
 
Java Man said:
Thermate can supply sulfur. Which was the question being asked. That's in the chemical composition of thermate.
Click to expand...
That's possible but, you would have to demonstrate that the high temperature corrosion observed can be duplicated with thermate. You'd have to experiment with different percentages of sulphur in the thermite to demonstrate this. No one has done so.

If you think that sulphur came from thermate then you'd also need to take the samples exposed to thermate and hold them at around 1000°C for 12/24/ hours to see if the corrosion mechanism occurred, notably an FeS-FeO eutectic and penetration of sulphur below the surface of the solid steel..

This is one of the easiest experiments to do and would take about 3-4 days of work if you could get someone to mount, grind, polish and etch samples (from steel exposed to thermate with differing sulphur levels) and then take a couple of (micro)photographs. Available at any university with a metallurgical dept.

Many truthers have used thermite/mate on steel, but none has ever had any metallurgical examination performed.

Ask yourself this - if an experiment is so simple, takes very little time and costs peanuts then why haven't any of the main proponents of the therm*te theory ever asked truthers for a $10 donation to cover minuscule costs?

What are they afraid of?
 
Last edited:
Java Man said:
Oh I see, it's "the flow". Like the force, right? It flows over the metal and eats it away gently. That sounded very feng-shui-ish. If only it were plausible I'd congratulate you. But it isn't.
Click to expand...

Argument from incredulity noted. Again.

Imagine youself in an atmosphere of SO2, water vapour, CO2, CO, fine dust of all kinds, and all at several hundred degrees C.
You wouldn't bet on your skin to get away smoothly. And not just because it cooks. Very hot vapours of sulfuric acid are a very nasty thing to a lot of surfaces. Much more so than cold acid.
 
I have a question. Were there any floors with considerable server space on them? The sort of place you might get a big bunch of UPS type devices in one place?
 
beachnut said:
he is not using chemistry, he is using delusions from 911 truth. He has no clue sulfur dioxide comes from the fires at the WTC.

He has to ignore the fires from the WTC can have the following great things. Inorganic acidic compounds due to chlorine and fluorine in the tires, plastics and other stuff from the WTC, including hydrochloric acid (HCl ) and hydrofluoric acid (HF). Acidic sulfur compounds from sulfur in the tires and other WTC junk, including sulfur dioxide (SO2), sulfuric acid (H2SO4), sulfurous acid (H2SO3) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) which forms sulfuric acid on contact with water or atmospheric water vapor. Acidic nitrogen compounds due to combustion with excess air including but not limited to nitric acid (HNO3) and nitrous acid (HNO2).
Click to expand...

Be careful, Java's confused enough as it is, he's even posting pictures of the buildings post collapse and claiming cuts made by acetylene torches are thermite. LMFAO!
 
Sunstealer said:
P.S. Oh and the bolded above indicates your level of chemistry knowledge - it's wrong.
Click to expand...
Not that his knowledge of chemistry had been in question. For example...

Java Man said:
Not much really and the energy depends on the thermite. For example iron thermite Fe2O3(s) + 2Al(s) has ΔH = -851.5 kJ/mol. The Heat of fusion for iron is 13.81 kJ·mol−1. That's 62 times the energy per mol.

If we go to copper 3CuO(s) + 2Al(s), ΔH = -1203.8 kJ/mol

and manganese 3MnO2(s) + 4Al(s) ΔH = -1788.7 kJ/mol

So you see one kilo of thermite can melt many kilos of steel, no problem.
Click to expand...
What the above tells us is that Java Man
  • doesn't realize that, for this particular calculation, the specific heat is several times more important than the heat of fusion,
  • probably doesn't know how to spell the unit abbreviated by mol, and
  • doesn't know how to convert the units abbreviated by mol into kilograms.
 
It is also very likely, though I don't have absolute proof, that the Emergency Operations Center in Building 7 would have used battery backup systems in quantity.

The current EOC, described here, is basically a hundred computer workstations tied in with communications networks. The 2001 version was probably not as elegantly laid out (probably more like traditional office desks, maybe cubicles) but still had the same basic functions and needs. We know the EOC was still receiving calls (and therefore, still powered up to be able to receive calls) after the mains power went down, so it must have had backup power of some kind. It's highly likely there was a backup generator, but the last thing an emergency operations center (intended to deal with, among other possible emergencies, widespread blackouts) would want is all the computers crashing just as the power fails during the few seconds it takes a backup generator to kick in. Or for them to be damaged by power surges just when they're about to be needed. So UPSs for the equipment are a necessity, either a large bank (what they probably have now) or just an individual one at each desk (what they probably had then), doesn't matter because you have about 200 liters of H2SO4 on hand either way.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Last edited:
W.D.Clinger said:
What the above tells us is that Java Man
  • doesn't realize that, for this particular calculation, the specific heat is several times more important than the heat of fusion,
Click to expand...


  • Isn't all this happening in the middle of a fire? Didn't NIST claim temperatures in the range of 800 to 1000º?? It's not like we have to raise the metal from room temperature. You're claim that specific heat is significant undermines NIST's temperature observations.

    W.D.Clinger said:
    [*]probably doesn't know how to spell the unit abbreviated by mol, and
    Click to expand...

    That would be mole.

    W.D.Clinger said:
    [*]doesn't know how to convert the units abbreviated by mol into kilograms.
    Click to expand...

copper 3CuO(s) + 2Al(s), ΔH = -1203.8 kJ/mol

that reaction (per mole) produces enough energy to raise one kilo of iron 2616º

The specific heat of iron is:

0.46 (kJ/kg K)

The fusion heat is

247.29 kJ/kg

That's about 540 times larger.

So specific heat is not as significant as you want to portray it. Yes there is a high temperature required. But there are many heat sources available already and the area is hot. It is not as terrible as you want us to believe.
 
Sunstealer said:
P.S. Oh and the bolded above indicates your level of chemistry knowledge - it's wrong.
Click to expand...

Hey, I got that from that link you posted on how to get sulfur from gypsum ( on the 19th I believe). I've been looking for the SO4 solution too and until now it hasn't been put forward. Thanks for joining this conversation, hope we can get down to numbers now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom