I fail to see why some posters here find it necessary to try and make fun of how Tony looks or how he performed in an oral debate....seems a bit childish.
I agree. Many of the attacks in this thread are totally unsophisticated. All of you need to knock it off. Tony has made numerous mistakes you can pick on, if you wish, don't make an
ass of yourself by saying he looks dumb or should be selling cars. That's stupid.
I was totally confused by most of Tony's arguments, but I am an engineer. The one that I found most bizarre was the argument that if a plate was supported by 30 columns and 27 of them were removed than that would fail at 70% gravity. Seems complete nonsense to me. A buckling failure is a rapid failure and once initiated there is little or no resistance ..
Precisely right. Once the capacity is exceeded, the columns will resist only until they buckle, and afterwards don't resist much at all. As I noted in the debate, what slows the collapse is momentum transfer, not the strength. Dr. Bazant computes in the BLGB paper -- correctly -- that the structural strength is a minor correction to the overall collapse, so minor that you cannot tell whether all the columns were loaded to failure or simply pushed aside from the collapse time alone. It just doesn't make a significant difference.
I am not sure where he got the 3 from, but more importantly the floors are not designed to hold the building above, the columns are.
Yup. He may have originally gotten that factor of 3 from
Heiwa, but wherever he got it, it's wrong.
Already covered that in this very thread.
Regarding the nano- vs. micro- nature of the particles, I was referring to the particles within the paint chips, not the chips themselves. As Tony quotes:
From page 12 of the paper
The results indicate that the small particles with very high BSE
intensity (brightness) are consistently 100 nm in size and
have a faceted appearance. These bright particles are seen
intermixed with plate-like particles that have intermediate
BSE intensity and are approximately 40 nm thick and up to
about 1 micron across.
To say the particles were not nanometer size is not accurate.
But his interpretation is wrong. The "aluminum" flakes are hexagonal "plate-like" particles up to a micron across. They're micron sized, not nanometer sized. QED.
In
real nanothermite, as
described by its creators such as Dr. Tillotson, the aluminum is in spheres about 30-50 nm across, and the iron oxide in extremely small particles as small as 7 nm. The structures seen in Dr. Jones's samples are 20 to 100 times as large.
By the way, look up in what common forms aluminum oxide mineral occurs naturally. Here's a hint: Microscopic hexagonal platelets...
And, to answer the question above, aluminum oxide is inert for purposes of a thermite reaction. Its presence is a dead giveaway that it ain't thermite, nano- or otherwise.
I did poke fun at Ryan though, that screen shot was horrible. I couldn't figure out if it was part of the technical difficulty or they used it on purpose for effect.
I had no control over that. Gary chose the poses. If it brings a little levity, eh, what's the big deal?
---
Gary is also busily adding subtitles to the second show. I hope this helps improve the presentation. We work with what we have.
