Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[Christopher7]

Chris 7, When you said,
"You still don't know my position.
It's "iron melted and lead vaporized" establish temperatures far in excess of what office fires can attain."
You still evade the question of what that temperature IS. Is it above the melting point of iron (which is why I threw out the number 2800 degrees F)? What do you believe is the minimum temperature required to create iron-rich spheres?

I have said many times on this thread that iron melts at 2800^oF and lead vaporized at 3180^oF. Don't pretend you have not seen that.

I said 2800^oF in a response to you:

I do not "take everything RJ Lee says as gospel truth" but I do respect his expertise. The report says iron melted during the event and that requires 2800^oF.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8037560&postcount=1713

Granted, RJ Lee doesn't give a number either, but what he says in his last paragraph is very clear:

"The formation of iron and other type spheres at temperatures obtainable by the combustion of petroleum or coal based fuels is not a new or unique process. These spheres are the same as iron and alumino‐silicate spheres in the well‐studied fly ash formed from contaminants in coal as it is burned in furnaces.
Rich Lee"

Unlike the posters here, RJ Lee knows that fly ash is what goes up the chimney in a coal fired power plant and that most of the fly ash created during the fires would would leave the building with the smoke.

ETA: 80 to 90% of the towers were not on fire so none of those sources of spheres, be they rust or office contents, could have been generated until the buildings were pulverized during the collapses.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Unlike the posters here, RJ Lee knows that fly ash is what goes up the chimney in a coal fired power plant and that most of the fly ash created during the fires would would leave the building with the smoke.

Where is your data to back that assertion up? "most" could be as little as 51%.....

ETA: 80 to 90% of the towers were not on fire so none of those sources of spheres, be they rust or office contents, could have been generated until the buildings were pulverized during the collapses.

so if 10 - 20% of the building was on fire so how can none be generated untilthe building collapses.....that make no sense at all. If there some magic % that can suddenly create iron microspheres?

 

[MarkLindeman]

I have said many times on this thread that iron melts at 2800^oF and lead vaporized at 3180^oF. Don't pretend you have not seen that.

The problem, apparent to anyone who has skimmed the thread, is that you haven't demonstrated that iron had to melt in order to produce the iron-rich microspheres.

That is probably why Chris asked, "What do you believe is the minimum temperature required to create iron-rich spheres?" If your answer is 2800^oF, then the obvious question you have to confront is: can you support that answer?

If your support is that RJ Lee said so, then the next obvious question is: why do you agree? Parsing Lee's various statements doesn't advance the factual inquiry.

Unlike the posters here, RJ Lee knows that fly ash is what goes up the chimney in a coal fired power plant and that most of the fly ash created during the fires would would leave the building with the smoke.

Say what? Didn't the microspheres under discussion "leave the building"? (I could comment on other parts of your statement, but there isn't much point.)

ETA: 80 to 90% of the towers were not on fire so none of those sources of spheres, be they rust or office contents, could have been generated until the buildings were pulverized during the collapses.

Why not? Why couldn't they have been created before the fires, or in the portions of the towers that were on fire?

 

[GlennB]

Unlike the posters here, RJ Lee knows that fly ash is what goes up the chimney in a coal fired power plant and that most of the fly ash created during the fires would would leave the building with the smoke.

Far more rust would be exposed and dislodged during the collapse than was ever affected by heat while the Towers were standing. So I'm wondering why the iron-rich spherules couldn't be produced in the burning debris pile? Fires that burned for weeks.

(Though it's possible I've missed this being discussed earlier in the thread. )

 

[Edx]

Unlike the posters here, RJ Lee knows that fly ash is what goes up the chimney in a coal fired power plant and that most of the fly ash created during the fires would would leave the building with the smoke.

ETA: 80 to 90% of the towers were not on fire so none of those sources of spheres, be they rust or office contents, could have been generated until the buildings were pulverized during the collapses.

"....is not a new or unique process"

 

[chrismohr]

I have said many times on this thread that iron melts at 2800^oF and lead vaporized at 3180^oF. Don't pretend you have not seen that.

I said 2800^oF in a response to you:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8037560&postcount=1713


Unlike the posters here, RJ Lee knows that fly ash is what goes up the chimney in a coal fired power plant and that most of the fly ash created during the fires would would leave the building with the smoke.

ETA: 80 to 90% of the towers were not on fire so none of those sources of spheres, be they rust or office contents, could have been generated until the buildings were pulverized during the collapses.

Chris7,

You're right that you had given a minimum temperature for iron microspheres to be formed. My memory glitch, sorry. I'll let you and other JREFers battle out the where did the microspheres go question, I have no technical expertise to add to the discussion.

 

[Sunstealer]

Yet of course C7 acknowledges that iron-mocrospheres are formed in municipal waste incinerators and coal burners that operate BELOW 2800°F because he acknowledges that iron-microspheres are present in the fly ash. This is a central tenet to his "they all got blown away by the smoke" premise.

So he's saying you need a temperature greater than 2800F except when you don't. He's trying to hold two diametrically opposed positions at the same time, but he can't see it.

We know 2800F isn't required because we find iron-microspheres are produced in conditions that never get anywhere near the temperature of 2800F namely MSW plants and coal fired power stations. Therefore there is no need for temperatures in the WTC to reach as high as 2800F. Therefore no thermite required.

 

[chrismohr]

Yet of course C7 acknowledges that iron-mocrospheres are formed in municipal waste incinerators and coal burners that operate BELOW 2800°F because he acknowledges that iron-microspheres are present in the fly ash. This is a central tenet to his "they all got blown away by the smoke" premise.

So he's saying you need a temperature greater than 2800F except when you don't. He's trying to hold two diametrically opposed positions at the same time, but he can't see it.

We know 2800F isn't required because we find iron-microspheres are produced in conditions that never get anywhere near the temperature of 2800F namely MSW plants and coal fired power stations. Therefore there is no need for temperatures in the WTC to reach as high as 2800F. Therefore no thermite required.

Does that mean all the rest is just smoke blowing out a chimney?

 

[GlennB]

Yet of course C7 acknowledges that iron-mocrospheres are formed in municipal waste incinerators and coal burners that operate BELOW 2800°F because he acknowledges that iron-microspheres are present in the fly ash. This is a central tenet to his "they all got blown away by the smoke" premise.

So he's saying you need a temperature greater than 2800F except when you don't. He's trying to hold two diametrically opposed positions at the same time, but he can't see it.

We know 2800F isn't required because we find iron-microspheres are produced in conditions that never get anywhere near the temperature of 2800F namely MSW plants and coal fired power stations. Therefore there is no need for temperatures in the WTC to reach as high as 2800F. Therefore no thermite required.

^ that

 

[Josarhus]

Harrit in a recent debate said, and I quote:

"But there is plenty of head room in the analysis of the RJ Lee Group, to allow up to three thermitic materials being used."

I think that it is his way of "explaining" how his chips in the Bentham paper are not the same, without actually admitting it.

From Millette’s work we now know that the chips are not thermite but probably paint, but could WTC paint chips "act" thermitic and form theses spheres under the right conditions?

 

[alienentity]

Harrit in a recent debate said, and I quote:

"But there is plenty of head room in the analysis of the RJ Lee Group, to allow up to three thermitic materials being used."

I think that it is his way of "explaining" how his chips in the Bentham paper are not the same, without actually admitting it.

From Millette’s work we now know that the chips are not thermite but probably paint, but could WTC paint chips "act" thermitic and form theses spheres under the right conditions?

If I understand you correctly, it's the wrong question or perhaps moot. You don't need thermitics to form these kinds of spherules or spheres.

 

[Josarhus]

If I understand you correctly, it's the wrong question or perhaps moot. You don't need thermitics to form these kinds of spherules or spheres.

I know that, and the spheres in the RJ Lee study were probably from multiple sources, not counting thermite.

But could the specific chips create these spheres or similar in a thermitic reaction?

The reason why I am asking is that I belive that they can, and that it is completely normal under the given surcumstances.

 

[alienentity]

I know that, and the spheres in the RJ Lee study were probably from multiple sources, not counting thermite.

But could the specific chips create these spheres or similar in a thermitic reaction?

The reason why I am asking is that I belive that they can, and that it is completely normal under the given surcumstances.

That's a good question, and I don't know the answer either...

 

[GlennB]

But could the specific chips create these spheres or similar in a thermitic reaction?

The reason why I am asking is that I belive that they can, and that it is completely normal under the given surcumstances.

'Completely normal' in what way? A 'thermitic reaction' requires elemental, metallic Al and none has been found in any of these chips under study, as far as I know.

 

[Josarhus]

'Completely normal' in what way? A 'thermitic reaction' requires elemental, metallic Al and none has been found in any of these chips under study, as far as I know.

Again, I know that they are not thermite, but could they react in a similar way and create these or similar spheres?

Harrit and his followers is focusing more and more on these spheres and less on the chips being thermite. Probably because they already know that the chips are not thermite and now need something to cling to.

But if the chips as I suspect, either as chips or from where they originate also were a natural source for the spheres, then they would loose that point as well.

 

[Christopher7]

Chris7,

You're right that you had given a minimum temperature for iron microspheres to be formed. My memory glitch, sorry. I'll let you and other JREFers battle out the where did the microspheres go question, I have no technical expertise to add to the discussion.

The RJ Lee report says that the iron spheres are from melted iron or steel. Fly ash is not iron, it is iron oxide.

By focusing on the spheres rather than the statement that iron melted, you try to confuse the issue.

"Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the melting of iron (or steel)."

Iron melts at 2800^oF.

 

[Oystein]

Again, I know that they are not thermite, but could they react in a similar way and create these or similar spheres?

Harrit and his followers is focusing more and more on these spheres and less on the chips being thermite. Probably because they already know that the chips are not thermite and now need something to cling to.

But if the chips as I suspect, either as chips or from where they originate also were a natural source for the spheres, then they would loose that point as well.

What would you consider as similar? The thermite reaction, as opposed to, say, ordinary organic combustion, is characterized by the following features:

• Need no atmospheric (gaseous) oxygen (O comes from solid metal oxide)
• Produces no gaseous reaction products
• Because of these first two points, can (but doesn't necessarily) reach temperatures in excess of 1500°C
• While one substance (the free, metallic aluminum) gets oxidized, annother (iron oxide) gets reduced, producing an elemental metal (iron))

So what similarity are you looking for? The high temps, or the reducing of metal oxide?

Well, because gases are involved as well as oxidized inorganic pigements, the paint chips will not reach any remarkable temperatures when burned. It is in theory conceivable that under some conditions, some of the carbon matrix burns inefficiently and produces carbon monixide (CO). CO in turn is indeed able to reduce iron oxide to iron. But I'd doubt that this would happen to all or most of the iron oxide, if at all. Much more likely, the pigments will be left after incineration of the epoxy as they were before, and get concentrated. Perhaps if some of the epoxy doesn't burn away, it (or its solid residues) forms spheres and trap the pigments.

I doubt that iron or iron oxide actually melts to form such spheres.

 

[BasqueArch]

The RJ Lee report says that the iron spheres are from melted iron or steel. Fly ash is not iron, it is iron oxide.

By focusing on the spheres rather than the statement that iron melted, you try to confuse the issue.

"Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the melting of iron (or steel)."

Iron melts at 2800^oF.

Do you ever tire of not being right.

...the melting temperatures of nanoparticles can be greatly reduced compared to bulk materials, due to the large ratio of surface atoms to inner atoms. For example, the melting temperature of iron particles in the range of a few nanometers lies approximately between 200~400°C compared to 1538°C for bulk iron.

http://www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/pp/projects/laserprintforming.html

No thermite either.
You're out of ammo.

 

[Christopher7]

"Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the melting of iron (or steel)."

Do you ever tire of not being right.
http://www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/pp/projects/laserprintforming.html

They were not referring to nano particles when they said:
"melting of iron (or steel)"

They were referring to "bulk" iron or steel.

They also also said that lead volatilized [vaporized] during the collapse and that indicates 3180^oF.

I inquired again but Dr. Lee is out of the office this week so we will have to wait for his reply.

 

[000063]

The problem, apparent to anyone who has skimmed the thread, is that you haven't demonstrated that iron had to melt in order to produce the iron-rich microspheres. ...

He doesn't have to demonstrate things that are "self evident".