Gravity defying buildings? :D

[T.A.M.]

The color is a function of wavelength and has nothing to do with the underlying material. So I ask you, how can a material that is cooler and thus has less energy emit a higher frequency (lower wavelength) color than one that is hotter and thus has more energy.

wrong. The color emitted by material x is NOT only a reflection of the temperature. If that were the case, explain to me how fireworks glow blue, green, etc...

Think before you speak, and read the article I linked you to.

TAM

 

[excaza]

And the structural steel would emit red light waves at a different wavelength than "red" for what reason exactly? So you're telling us that the wavelength of red coming from structural steel is different from the wavelength of red coming from aluminium? Two wavelengths for the same color. Are you redefining the term "color blind"?

The only thing I told you was to do an experiment.

But I can understand how "get some structural steel and heat it up" could be misinterpreted as "structural steel would emit red light waves at a different wavelength than "red" "

 

[Java Man]

This is an article on fireworks, and colors. It includes, as we have discussed, the properties of temperature/heat and light, but also goes into a few other things that are applicable here.

http://chemistry.about.com/od/fireworkspyrotechnics/a/fireworkcolors.htm

TAM

I quote from your article. Thanks for proving me right once again.

"Incandescence

Incandescence is light produced from heat. Heat causes a substance to become hot and glow, initially emitting infrared, then red, orange, yellow, and white light as it becomes increasingly hotter. When the temperature of a firework is controlled, the glow of components, such as charcoal, can be manipulated to be the desired color (temperature) at the proper time. Metals, such as aluminum, magnesium, and titanium, burn very brightly and are useful for increasing the temperature of the firework."

Was the metal we see pouring out "burning"? So now you're going to change your line to "burning aluminium"? Now first it was aluminium, then lead, then the magic crucible, then my photos were not good enough to show molten aluminium, then the airplanes didn't actually burn, but now it IS burning aluminium?

When is your magic dancing arguments going to stop? Are you planing on making up your mind any time soon?

 

[Sabretooth]

Huh? Why do I need an entire helicopter? There are but trace amounts of molten metal there. Lead would also explain its location near the cabin area. Why is that spot only "dripping" molten metal and not the rest? Was the part under the turbines the only one made out of aluminium?

Seeing that most of the skin of the aircraft is gone, that would answer that question...

 

[Java Man]

The only thing I told you was to do an experiment.

I did, and guess what the table of color vs temperature holds. So yes that material there was hotter than the fire.

 

[Java Man]

Seeing that most of the skin of the aircraft is gone, that would answer that question...

Yup, it charred and burned rather than melt. Just like the "low quality" photos I posted.

 

[excaza]

Show us your data then.

 

[T.A.M.]

I quote from your article. Thanks for proving me right once again.

"Incandescence

Incandescence is light produced from heat. Heat causes a substance to become hot and glow, initially emitting infrared, then red, orange, yellow, and white light as it becomes increasingly hotter. When the temperature of a firework is controlled, the glow of components, such as charcoal, can be manipulated to be the desired color (temperature) at the proper time. Metals, such as aluminum, magnesium, and titanium, burn very brightly and are useful for increasing the temperature of the firework."

Was the metal we see pouring out "burning"? So now you're going to change your line to "burning aluminium"? Now first it was aluminium, then lead, then the magic crucible, then my photos were not good enough to show molten aluminium, then the airplanes didn't actually burn, but now it IS burning aluminium?

When is your magic dancing arguments going to stop? Are you planing on making up your mind any time soon?

Changed the bolding for you.

Charcoal is an impurity is it not?

Once again, if materials only emit light colored based solely on temperatures (as listed by you), then how do we get blue and green fireworks???

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Here is another quote from that article...

Pure colors require pure ingredients. Even trace amounts of sodium impurities (yellow-orange) are sufficient to overpower or alter other colors. Careful formulation is required so that too much smoke or residue doesn't mask the color. With fireworks, as with other things, cost often relates to quality. Skill of the manufacturer and date the firework was produced greatly affect the final display (or lack thereof).

So according to you ALL MATERIALS (metals, glass, other) do not influence the color produced, so why do they list the impurities/salts above, and how careful you have to be with them, or else they will alter the color given off?

TAM

 

[Java Man]

Here is another quote from that article...


So according to you ALL MATERIALS (metals, glass, other) do not influence the color produced, so why do they list the impurities/salts above, and how careful you have to be with them, or else they will alter the color given off?

TAM

When did we go from melting to burning?

Take a look here Read down to "Metal Temperature by Color"

 

[excaza]

Data from your experiment, Java?

 

[dafydd]

The color is a function of wavelength and has nothing to do with the underlying material. So I ask you, how can a material that is cooler and thus has less energy emit a higher frequency (lower wavelength) color than one that is hotter and thus has more energy.

Have you ever had a physics lesson in your life?

 

[T.A.M.]

As I have said, I am well aware that the light given off, purely as a reflection of Incandescence for pure metals, is Red Orange Yellow White, regardless of the metal type.

FOR PURE METALS, NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT IMPURITIES, NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT EMMISSIVITY or LUMINESCENCE.

So what we saw (coming out of the WTC) was PURELY melting metal, and no burning of any substance what so ever, is this your claim?

TAM

 

[Java Man]

As I have said, I am well aware that the light given off, purely as a reflection of Incandescence for pure metals, is Red Orange Yellow White, regardless of the metal type.

FOR PURE METALS, NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT IMPURITIES, NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT EMMISSIVITY or LUMINESCENCE.

So what we saw (coming out of the WTC) was PURELY melting metal, and no burning of any substance what so ever, is this your claim?

TAM

Once again. If steel emits one hue of red at a certain temperature and nickel emits the same hue at the same temperature. Explain to us why the mixture would emit a different hue at the same temperature?

 

[T.A.M.]

Once again. If steel emits one hue of red at a certain temperature and nickel emits the same hue at the same temperature. Explain to us why the mixture would emit a different hue at the same temperature?

The emissivity of each may be different. They may have impurities in them (sodium salts, calcium salts, etc....) which may cause them to glow different colors at different temperatures then their purified forms (which is what your color chart is for...pure metals).

Once again,

1. Are you claiming that what we saw was ONLY the MELTING of a PURE METAL? No burning? No other materials melting or burning?
2. How do you explain how we get blue or green fireworks?
3. Are you saying that melted glass will only turn orange, regardless of composition, at temps of 1500-1700F?


TAM

 

[Java Man]

So what we saw (coming out of the WTC) was PURELY melting metal, and no burning of any substance what so ever, is this your claim?

TAM

More so, let us suppose that it is impure. Will those impurities make it brighter or dimmer?

 

[T.A.M.]

More so, let us suppose that it is impure. Will those impurities make it brighter or dimmer?

I dunno. The article I linked to does make note of the following, though.

Pure colors require pure ingredients. Even trace amounts of sodium impurities (yellow-orange) are sufficient to overpower or alter other colors. Careful formulation is required so that too much smoke or residue doesn't mask the color. With fireworks, as with other things, cost often relates to quality. Skill of the manufacturer and date the firework was produced greatly affect the final display (or lack thereof).

But I am not an expert.

TAM

 

[Java Man]

I dunno. The article I linked to does make note of the following, though.



But I am not an expert.

TAM

But you keep mixing burning with melting. The temperature at which magnesium burns is one thing different from the color it has at 1000º. Two different beasts. You said it yourself. The color is altered by changing the temperature of the charcoal, not the charcoal.

You can change the color of a metal by heating it with different products (coal, natural gas, electricity). Each fuel will burn at a different temperature and be able to heat the metal more and thus achieve a different color (red, orange, yellow and so forth). But once heated it will be the same color because the metal is radiating and not burning.

Go back up to the article you showed us and read it again. You'll see how you explained it well the first time. Don't understand the confusion now.

 

[Java Man]

careful formulation is required so that too much smoke or residue doesn't mask the color.)

So residue seems to dim the color. Thus residue on the surface of the puring material would make it look dimmer than it actually is. Working against your theory because a dimmed yellow hue means a really higher yellow or whitish color without impurities. Thus the temperature is even HOTTER than "seen". Impurities thus further the thermite theory rather than hamper it.

 

[bardamu]

The better analogy is this...

The 9/11 attacks were large in scope, and complex in nature (in terms of them being planned well in advance, involved many people, and occurred at different locations simultaneously).

The hijackers had already won a few lotteries by the time they'd taken control of the cockpits, and they still had enough luck in reserve to be able to dodge US air defenses and destroy 7 buildings with 2 planes.