[ETA]
You appear to be ignoring the importance that location plays regarding the concentration of thermitic material found in the WTC dust.
Red chips spread by the dust clouds would be expected to be more evenly mixed and of lower concentration than those found at Ground Zero.
I am not ignoring anything, I am only going by the evidence that we actually have. You are speculating. Yes, it isn't entirely unplausible that concentration of this red-gray material would vary with location, but how and how much you can't know, at least as long as you haven't studied that.
Neils Harrit was primarily concerned with the finding of active thermitic material within the WTC dust samples. None of those samples came from inside of the Ground Zero debris pile.
I don't blame him. Again, this is the only evidence we have, anything else is speculation.
Given that the highest concentrations of thermitic material would be in the immediate proximity of the core columns,
You are speculating and assuming the conclusion. Don't do that. It's a logical fallacy. You have precisely NO evidence at all that any thermite was ever near the core columns, and you have yet to present even a theory that would have such an arrangement.
and given the rapid implosion of the 3 WTC towers, larger concentrations of unspent pulverized thermitic material would be expected to lie in the debris zone that matched the fallen core columns.
Truthers in 2001-2011: making up stories as they go.
I would argue that there is good reason to expect the dust in the immediate debris pile to have areas with greater but variable thermitic concentrations than those areas peripheral to Ground Zero.
What reason would that be? You are merely guessing and imagining this, right?
You have drawn the false conclusion that the red chip concentrations in the debris pile match those found in the peripheral samples tested by Dr. Harrit.
You need to look up the meaning of the word "conclusion". I did not draw this as a conclusion, I took that as my assumption. You are free to criticise that and substitute with your assumption; I only require that you put numbers to it: What WAS the concentration then in ALL of the debris, MM? You seem to want to have a higher concentration, right? Problem is, that would increase the end result ("how much red-gray material was there to begin with?") to even more ridiculous heights.
We are talking about nano-thermite or super thermite. There is very little publicly available documentation regarding the variability of its ignition temperatures in conjunction with all its possible formulations.
True, but that does not mean that you can make up any numbers and properties that you wish you stuff to have. There are two scientifically valid ways: Do experiments, or derive value from theory. No one has done the latter, most ominously neither you nor Harrit e.al., so we need to stick with the former and take values from those experiments that we have. Harrit himself quoted Tillotson, so that's what I go by: >500°C. If you want to argue 430°C, you cannot assert that just so, but must provide references or theoretical calculations.
Again, you are drawing false conclusions based on the assumption that the Tillotson information gives an exact accounting of the nature of nano-thermite.
You are free to substitute my assumption with assumptions of your own, but I'd fully expect you to provide numbers, and reasoning or references. You know my numbers, and my reference. At least try to match me!
Organics will not burn without a steady source of oxygen. Dump loose wood on a fire and it will blaze nicely. Dump the equivalent amount of wood in the form of sawdust and you will most likely smother the fire.
Would you attempt to put out a fire by dumping saw dust on it? Do you think you would succeed?
The debris pile was deep and saturated with highly compacted dust.
Are you telling me underground fires are not possible?
Anyway, I think you overestimate the compaction rate.
You have failed to provide a realistic alternative explanation for the observed behavior and the longevity of the WTC Ground Zero hotspots.
Not my job. I am not making any claims about this.
Is your incredulity based on a belief that the workers above were playing pickup sticks as their debris removal technique?
No.
Apparently you know very little about the needs of combustion -- and breathing for that matter.
Enough.
Yes. Without a steady source of sufficient oxygen, the combustibles would quickly burn themselves out.
To the contrary, with an unsteady source of insufficient oxygen, the combustibles would very slowly burn themselves out!
I think this is worthy of a Stundy nomination.
Oxygen would not be an issue for the thermitic material, only a minimum 430 C ambient temperature.
??
Are you too lazy, or too arrogant to validate that meaningless summation?
It was a reply to a nonsense claim that itself came with zero validation.
Another unsupported opinion noted.
None of your opinions was supported to my satisfaction. Why should I bother?
MM, I presented you assumptions, did calculations, and ended with conclusions.
You have no assumptions of your own, do no calculations, and yet you have conclusions. How could that be?
You ignored, or possibly missed, an important lessen in my post:[/ETA]
Now we still have the problem that actual, stochiastic thermite (Fe2O3 + 2Al) was only about 5% of that material, so it had only an energy density from thermite of 0,075kJ/g, or 75J/g, or about 18 calories per gram. You know that a calory is the energy needed to warm 1g of water by 1°C. The specific heat of water is about 9.3 times that of iron; so 18 calories per gram could could warm 1 gram of iron by 168°C. Not even enough to sustain the thermite reaction, and a very far cry from melting iron.
Please note that the above holds true for concentrated red-gray material, supposing it did really contain thermite, as Harrot claims.
The energy density goes down even further for any bit of non-thermitic dust that you'd mix in during the collapse.
Conclusion: The stuff cannot burn at all, unless aided by organic matrix (epoxy). Thermite adds negligible heat.
Could you please address this argument that if there really is thermite in the red-gray material, its energy density would be so low it could not even warm itself enough to reach its own ignition temperature and thusly sustain the thermite reaction, let alone melt any metal? Thanks.
