Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

The aluminum would have stayed silver if gone molten.

Oh wow we're back to that.

I thought we were talking about microspheres???


Anyhoo, I posted this to another thread:

Well how about this experiment.

aluminiumglows.png


http://translate.google.com/transla...//www.nrk.no/vitenskap-og-teknologi/1.7793083

As far as I can make out it wasn't to show that aluminium glows when it melts, but to show the explosive reaction when it comes in contact with water.

However, look at what happened to it and how it behaves.

Oh and btw, people reporting molten steel in fires is common and so completely expected on 911.

The picture doesnt really do it justice, watch the video. Seems to hold its glow pretty well as its cascading down in their little test.
 
The aluminum would have stayed silver if gone molten.

You didn't even read what I was responding to.

You're reduced to going back in this thread, reading a reply that I posted and trying to contradict it, without bothering to find out if you're even on the same page.

You need to get a new hobby. You suck immeasurably at this.
 
Last edited:
we have a picture. No mistake. It's previous molten concrete with a gun partially melted to it.

Lol, you have a picture? And how are you so certain you know what the picture is OF? Because the police department put a plack behind it?

And btw a lot of different materials can and do melt in fires and are fully expected including many metals, not sure if you know this.
 
Last edited:
Anything and everything that happened after the collapses is irrelevant.[/QUOTE]

It is not. It was there at the crime scene. it's part of evidence.
 
You didn't even read what I was responding to.
You're reduced to going back in this thread, reading a reply that I posted and trying to contradict it, without bothering to find out if you're even on the same page.

You need to get a new hobby. You suck immeasurably at this.

He might have actually read it, the comprehension is where the issue is I think. SLT, you seem to be saying the same thing over and over again. Everyone here understands what you're saying, it's relevance is what seems to be the issue.

You think a lot of these things are odd, and not many others do.
 
Lol, you have a picture? And how are you so certain you know what the picture is OF? Because the police department put a plack behind it?

I'm in contact with the museum. I am to call back Monday to speak with the curator. I want to know where he got his information from.

And btw a lot of different materials can and do melt in fires and are fully expected including many metals, not sure if you know this.

Not concrete though. Yes I am aware of metal melting temperatures.
 
Anything and everything that happened after the collapses is irrelevant.
It is not. It was there at the crime scene. it's part of evidence.


It played no part in the collapse of the twin towers, therefore is irrelevant when discussing how they collapsed. I'm sure there were thousands of toilet handles there too. Did they play a part in the collapse?
 
Not concrete though. Yes I am aware of metal melting temperatures.

You're still not listenening. :rolleyes:

Lots of things will melt in a fire, including metals. How do you know that the piece you are looking at is melted concrete? Just admit it, the only reason you think its melted concrete is because of the plack the police department put behind it and I've already shown you how other people in other fires can be wrong by saying concrete and steel melted. How do you know its not other materials that melted, maybe even materials that are attached or fused to concrete, that you're looking at?

I can also show you how fire experts have also reported melted steel in other fires as well which shows that experts also make mistakes or mispeak. (Its not illegal lol)
 
Last edited:
What is the pink smoke from? The aluminum?

Don't know, maybe he tells us in the videos but I cant speak Norwegian.

There was far more metals than just aluminium in the towers, bear in mind. So it wouldnt have been pure aluminium. Its also possible it could be a camera white balance problem having issues with the intense light from the reaction, since it isnt mentioned at all in the article when they describe it "Melting looking at the video footage is light at the top, and go on to become gray. This is a typical situation if you have liquid aluminum at 900 degrees, and takes it down to the melting point of 660 degrees, says Simensen."

Point is, it explodes and creates a shower of glowing melted metal
 
Last edited:
Thank you, Almond. Can you give us some examples from your experince or from the literature, how abundant are such particles after some fires or in urban dust etc. (some rough numbers)?

Unfortunately, it's not such a simple matter as reporting a few percentages. The methods I use for analyzing dust, dirt, ash and debris focuses on individual analysis of particles in the SEM using X-ray EDS. I can estimate relative abundances within a statistical class (based on multivariate agglomerative nesting of the derived compositional data) on a particle basis. But if you hand the same sample to a wet chemist for processing, she'll come up with a completely different relative abundance (by weight) for iron.

We then run into the biggest problem of all: I'm aware of no studies which place even broad statistical estimates on those values. Baseline studies are useful for determining if you require some other process to explain an excess of iron microspheres. My typical baseline for an urban dust (a randomly sampled control taken from an unperturbed surface) is about 0.1% to 0.5%. This is easy enough to test, simply go to an urban center and collect some dust samples. Generally, researchers sample off of car windshields, storefront windows, door knobs and other flat surfaces upon which dust is likely to settle.

The baseline, however, doesn't account for any of the variables that could produce many more of said spheres. Two burning buildings may produce completely different ash clouds depending on the nature of the building materials and the fires themselves. Frankly, it's a wildly uncontrollable experiment.

If I were given a sample that contained 5% iron microspheres, I would look for another source of the iron microspheres beyond simple urban contamination. My typical abundance for iron rich microspheres in fly ash is anywhere from 0.3% to 4%, depending on the type of ash, the nature of the coal power plant, and whether or not it was magnetically separated out. In unprocessed ashes, I've found abundances from 0.1% to 10%, the latter coming from a waste industrial furnace.

That leads me to another point, when looking for another source, I would be completely satisfied if someone told me that two of the tallest skyscrapers in Manhattan were on fire for hours and then collapsed, spewing dust and ash all over downtown. "Yep," I would say, "That explains it." Pigments, inks, toner cartridges, colorants, dyes, paints, when they combust, they will leave behind the iron microspheres that were originally there, but the iron microspheres now make up a significant portion of the ash. We then have heat, abrasion, and the collapse mechanics, all of which are capable of liberating or producing more of these spheres. These spheres, by the way, are produced at temperatures far below the melting point of bulk iron.
 
I hope you'll watch the whole video, it has a lot of compelling arguments!

As I said earlier I watch all your stuff. I happen to have inside knowledge, that a few truthers are working on refuting you. Last I heard they were through about 15 of your videos. They wish to wait until all are complete before they surface on You Tube.

Anyway, I would like to challenge you to a new thread I want to open. I wish to propose a debate with you (and everyone) on the free fall acceleration of WTC 7. In your video, you basically cite the NIST report saying that all the columns fell inside first and then the exterior shell fell at free fall. That is am impossability.

I will present the argument that a single column failure could not have lead to the entire collapse of the building.

Challenge.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom