Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

Oystein said:
I have no inclination to read back on your current exchange with C7, I just want to point out one thing: The potential energy of the erected buildings, liberated by the collapse and briefly turned into KE before finding its final resting place on the ground, mostly did work to deform and fracture material (yep, practically all the pulverisation is explained by that), but pretty little of it turned into heat. That heat translates into a very tiny increase of temperature. To put some numbers to it in a thought experiment: Strip the tower of everything that is not steel, so you are left with the the steel frame, floor decking, rebar. The center of mass of that steel structure would be at maybe 40% of the height of the tower, or 167m. A given kg of steel would thus, on average, have a potential energy of PE = m*h*g = 1kg * 167m * 9.8m/s2 = 1637 J

Iron has a molar heat capacity of 25.1J/mol/K. 1 mol of iron is 0.055845kg, so heat capacity by mass is 450J/(kg*K)

If you apply 1637J of heat to 1kg of iron, you warm it by 1637J / 450Jkg-1K-1 = 3.54°C.

Since most of the potential energy in fact goes into other energy sinks, the building material warms up by much less than 1°C on average.


It is of course possible that, through random distribution, very small bits heat up momentarily by much more than that, but reaching the melting point of anything interesting is exceedingly unlikely. That is simply not a way to create high temperatures. (part of the reason is that collision velocities remained rather low; final speed of the collapse front was under 100m/s. I'd sooner believe that the plane crashes may have melted or vaporized very small amounts of perhaps aluminium).


That leaves us with occasional sparks created by friction, but overall, spheres created from mechanical work of the collapses would be totally insignificant in the masses of dust and debris.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. I've been struggling with the friction end of the collapse (I don't know why) as of late. I remember now these figures.

Every once in a while I need a slap of math to bring me back.

:o
 
superlogicalthinker said:
Considering high temperatures.....and I have established beyond a reasonable doubt that the temperatures were present DURING the destruction and the spheres were created DURING the destruction from the RJ Lee report.
Click to expand...

You don't get to decide what you have proven beyond a reasonable doubt....thats the job of others to judge and I for one say you have failed to prove any such thing.

This eliminates the clean up theory, and all the other theory's which are not referenced by the RJ Lee Group.
Click to expand...

Only if one accepts your premise and I for one do not.

I'll post the quote again, so you all can misunderstand it.....again.

Considering the high temperatures reached during the destruction of
the WTC, the following three types of combustion products would be expected to be present in WTC Dust.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Super, now we don't have to worry about the "clean up" adding iron.....RJ Lee says it was expected from the fires and collapse. Now show us where they think thermite etc was used......if you can't, and you can't, then its a safe assumption that they know what happens in a big fire much better than you and know what is and is not expected in such a fire. Unless they are lying about it being expected but not lying about the levels? Why would they do that?
 
Last edited:
superlogicalthinker said:
The official reports contradict Newtons laws repeatedly through out the entire read.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

where? bet you can't show us a single example.

maybe you are thinking along the lines of Gage?:D

BoxBoy.jpg
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Super, now we don't have to worry about the "clean up" adding iron.....RJ Lee says it was expected from the fires and collapse. Now show us where they think thermite etc was used......if you can't, and you can't, then its a safe assumption that they know what happens in a big fire much better than you and know what is and is not expected in such a fire. Unless they are lying about it being expected but not lying about the levels? Why would they do that?
Click to expand...


You don't understand , Super is saying RJ Lee said that the iron microspheres were expected because of the high temperatures BUT NOT the high temperatures from the fire, high temperatures from the thermite. He is saying that is what RJ Lee meant when they wrote that, apparently really casually and that don't seem to care that they just uncovered a massive conspiracy and nor does anyone else seem to notice this apart from truthers like Super.
 
Last edited:
sheeplesnshills said:
Probably so, but what % would they have added? You don't know? Then how how can you say 6% is too high......

stop guessing, do the math.
Click to expand...

6% is too high, if you construe that as "percentage of elemental iron (spherical) in 9/11 dust".

Period.



Reason: Total iron in dust sampled very shortly after 9/11 was consistently in a range between 0.5 and 2.5%, and a mean between 0.8 and 1.6%, regardless of particle shape. RJ Lee figure is an extreme outlier and not representative of the dust created and accumulated on the day of 9/11 itself.
 
Last edited:
I am entertained at how there are several reports against the idea of thermite being used. There are engineers, architects, and controlled demo people that say it is impossible to do.

This whole argument, on the truther side, is based off of 1 sentence in 1 report from WTC dust that was collected 9 months after the collapse. 1 sentence, that's it. Not entire paragraphs from multiple reports, etc. 1 sentence, and at times, troofers have boiled it down to 3 words, out of the ENTIRE report.

Come on, really? If any part of this theory was substantiated wouldn't there be more than 1 sentence from 1 report? Talk about hanging on by the fingertips
 
Christopher7 said:
Did he subtract the weight of the exterior walls? They were pushed outside and did not contribute any energy to the pulverization or the heat. Next subtract all the material being ejected in the huge mushroom cloud.
Click to expand...

so what happened to the energy released in them going from being hundreds of feet in the air to them being lying on the ground?

The problem is - there is no way to accurately calculate that so anyone saying that they can reasonably estimate the amount of energy available to pulverize everything and create huge amounts of heat is a couple beats shy of a bar.
Click to expand...

yet you are doing just that by saying heat is not enough:D I love it when twoofers debunk themselves.
 
plague311 said:
I am entertained at how there are several reports against the idea of thermite being used. There are engineers, architects, and controlled demo people that say it is impossible to do.

This whole argument, on the truther side, is based off of 1 sentence in 1 report from WTC dust that was collected 9 months after the collapse. 1 sentence, that's it. Not entire paragraphs from multiple reports, etc. 1 sentence, and at times, troofers have boiled it down to 3 words, out of the ENTIRE report.

Come on, really? If any part of this theory was substantiated wouldn't there be more than 1 sentence from 1 report? Talk about hanging on by the fingertips
Click to expand...

One sentence and absolutely no commentary about such amazing find in the rest of the paper, no commentary from any of the authors or any professional organisations that would have read it, no one anywhere apart from the fringe few truthers years later insisting that RJ Lee knew that thermite melted steel and proved 911 was an inside job. Not sure why they think everyone would be so blase and casual about this if they really believed this.
 
Christopher7 said:
I'm glad to hear that you are creative but you are ignoring this: "iron melted during the WTC event producing spherical iron particles".

The point here is the 2800oF it takes to melt iron.

Some people are so arrogant that they actually think that they know better than the RJ Lee Group - go figure. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


or you are so arrogant that you think that a fire heat of 2800 degrees is the only way to create iron microspheres. RJ Lee make no such claim so why do you insist that they do?
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Super, now we don't have to worry about the "clean up" adding iron.....RJ Lee says it was expected from the fires and collapse. Now show us where they think thermite etc was used......if you can't, and you can't, then its a safe assumption that they know what happens in a big fire much better than you and know what is and is not expected in such a fire. Unless they are lying about it being expected but not lying about the levels? Why would they do that?
Click to expand...

They were expected considering the extreme temperatures. The extreme temps happened during the destruction of the WTC.

and two plus two is four.
Click to expand...
 
superlogicalthinker said:
They were expected considering the extreme temperatures. The extreme temps happened during the destruction of the WTC.

and two plus two is four.
Click to expand...

So again, I have asked this many times, why are they so blase and casual about admtting that they have proved that there were impossible temperatures on 911 that can only be explained with thermite?

But they dont actually say there were impossibly high temperatures do they Super? You are just deciding that "high temperatures" means "thermite" even though everyone accepts there were high temperatures. If they really believed that there were impossibly high temperatures that can only be explained with thermite than why is it only 1 line, said extremely casually, in the entire report? Why dont any of the authors say anything about this since? Why isnt there any professional commentary about it? Why doesnt anyone seem to care apart from a few truthers like you? Why do all these experts behave so strangely?
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
6% is too high, if you construe that as "percentage of elemental iron (spherical) in 9/11 dust".

Period.



Reason: Total iron in dust sampled very shortly after 9/11 was consistently in a range between 0.5 and 2.5%, and a mean between 0.8 and 1.6%, regardless of particle shape. RJ Lee figure is an extreme outlier and not representative of the dust created and accumulated on the day of 9/11 itself.
Click to expand...


I know that, you know that......I'm just encouraging the twoofers to actually work it out for themselves so that they can know it too......yes I know they very likely can't but even if they try they might just come to the realization that they really have no clue........
 
Edx said:
[edited out huge size font]

There must be some kind of rule that says you cant keep spamming colors and huge fonts cluttering up a thread like this for no reason.

...<snip>...
Click to expand...


Actually, there is; you are not allowed 'disruptive posting' or words to that effect.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
or you are so arrogant that you think that a fire heat of 2800 degrees is the only way to create iron microspheres. RJ Lee make no such claim so why do you insist that they do?
Click to expand...

"Considering high temperature"

This is the part of the sentence that is preparing the reader for what they expected.

"the following three types of combustion products would be expected to be present in WTC dust"

This is the part of the sentence that confirms what they expected due to the high temperatures they previously considered. The high temperature of 2800F.

It's that simple boys really. Kind of like Grade 7 physics. Simple.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
very good. now please show where they tell you the extreme temperatures were "unexpected"?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I have slt on ignore. Has he told us yet what minimum value in °F or °C "extreme temperatures" imply, and how he knows that's what RJ Lee means?
 
Super you keep posting the same stuff over and over again, you keep ignoring all responses to it and just keep repeating yourself. Why is that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom