Merged "Iron-rich spheres" - scienctific explanation?

[DGM]

They were perfectly clear. Iron melted and lead was vaporized during the event and the dust was deposited by the dust clouds from the collapses.

So? How much "therm?te" would be needed if you're correct? Would you expect other visual/physical evidence left by that amount?

 

[Christopher7]

"iron and lead were melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles."
Any microspheres from cutting torches did not have the mechanism to deposit them in and on top of the building like the dust clouds from the collapses.

Not the same mechanism, but a mechanism

Keep reading this until you understand it:
RJ Lee Group report 2004
Pg 4 [pdf pg 5]
The pressure differential was caused by the onrush of the WTC Dust cloud that was created by the collapse of the WTC Towers with a low pressure inside Building components and high pressure outside. A huge pressure difference was created that caused large quantities of dust laden air to move through unplanned pathways. Individual components or devices with internal spaces effectively acted like a vacuum cleaner pulling the dust into them with great force.

Do you have any indication of what temperature RJ Lee considers "extreme"?

Pg 21 [pdf pg 25]
The amount of energy introduced during the generation of the WTC Dust and the ensuing conflagration caused various components to vaporize. Vapor phase components with high boiling point and high melting point would have, as they cooled, tended to form precipitated particles or thin film deposits on available surfaces through condensation mechanisms. The results of this process would be the presence of a thin layer of deposited material on the surfaces of the dust particulate matter. Many of the materials, such as lead, cadmium, mercury and various organic compounds, vaporized and then condensed during the WTC Event.

Lead Melting point 622oF [328oC]
Boiling point - Vaporization 3182oF [1,750oC]
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/melting-boiling-temperatures-d_392.html

The buildings were being reduced to dust at the very beginning of the destruction. There was not enough energy in the descending structure to do this. After that, dust cannot turn concrete into dust.

 

[DGM]

The buildings were being reduced to dust at the very beginning of the destruction. There was not enough energy in the descending structure to do this. After that, dust cannot turn concrete into dust.

Where did you get this idea? Wouldn't it be cool if you could do that math for that.

It's funny. Your post explains how the "micro-spheres" could be created yet you still think it was suspicious.

Maybe if someone read that paper to you.

 

[BasqueArch]

BA: (1) Oystein’s calculations show that many tons of thermxte would be needed to produce the amount of iron microspheres it is claimed were the result of the use of thermxte.

SLT:

Both explosives and incediaries played a role in the destruction of the twin towers. Why is it you guys only talk about thermite?

No explosives, too loud so said Jones and Gage and Harrit said thermxte was used because it's inaudible, then he says hundreds of tons of high explosives were used also. Cuckoo.
But I know conspiracists don't have a problem here. "I don't have a Truther Believer problem. I Believe. I fall down, I get up, no problem".

We guys talk about fire and damage, it's you guys that talk about thermite.

(2) Quote: BA
Powdered thermxte: A number of experiments, including one by Cole show that structural steel immersed in thermxte does not damage these and therefore cannot produce weakening of the structure, melt steel, or produce iron microspheres.


SLT: Wow!...Did you happen to see Jon cut a verticle slit, by the use of thermate, in stuctural steel. Jon Cole debunked myth busters for free from his back yard.
The tunnel vision you see with is clouding your judgement.

You are totally uninformed about what is going on from which to infer what is occurring. Check Cole at 7:30 - 8:15 min. He agrees with me not you.

BA: (3) Painted on sol-gel thermxte: There’s not enough energy for a thin layer of T-paint to heat structural steel sufficient to weaken the structure, melt steel, or produce iron microspheres

SLT: Source?

The Jones -Harrit data they produced.

(4)
Quote: BA
Thermxte in a container: Cole’s experiment shows that the only means to damage the structural steel is to contain the thermxte in a device attached to the steel that focuses the heat through a slit. The slit in this steel container itself melts, and the container survives. Another tube device, open at one end burns a hole in the structural steel.. None of these devices were found in the debris. .....

SLT: I'm sure the U.S Military can figure that one out. Self consuming cases exist. This one is made of copper, which has a low enough melting point for the thermite to consume it, or at least most of it so it does not look like a casing upon ignition. http://www.havoc.com.au/linear_charge.html

Those casings are made for explosives. Copper melts at 1084C thermxte burns at 2500C . It would melt the copper casing slit quickly. Cole observes that as the steel slit melts, the steel melting effect diminishes. Perhaps you can ask him to build a casing that melts steel and doesn't leave evidence behind. Make sure to tell us if he fails.

Quote: BA:
The slag and damage around the burnt area next to these devices would remain as a suspicious clue of this use. Cole's experiments did not produce "pools of molten steel", only an amount equal to the size of the slit cut in the steel.

SLT: He only cut one slit out of one column. You do understand how irrelevant that statment was don't you? What a waste of typing that was.

Jon cut a verticle slit in strucural steel by the use of themate. He also reduced a peice of stuctural steel to razor sharpness by the use of thermate.. Sound familliar Fema?

It appears you need some assistance with this.
Obvious T-device produces one slit only . The amount of melted pools of steel would require impractical amounts and impractical larger devices to achieve this.
To produce rivers of molten steel.
Continuously.
For 6 weeks.

Quote: BA
No suspicious devices, telltale damage or slag was found by first responders or the engineers that inspected the WTC steel. No triggering devices were found.


SLT: No, but what was found was molten metal flowing like lava. We've all heard Capt. Ruvolo.

I thought you understood what I've explained twice and what others have been talking about for years. The molten metal would have been molten aluminum not steel. It's steel that's the point here, or are you trying to muddy the waters.

(5)
Quote: BA
Niels Harrit stated that “some thermite has been used for melting the steel beams” and that also “Tons! Hundreds of tons! Many, many, many tons!” of conventional explosives were still used to demo the Towers.


It's a personal opinion. Do you have any of those. Or does Oystien think for you?

???
Oystein is one cool cat.
That theologian you worship is the pied piper of prevarication. He's fooled you and many others.
It's a direct quote from Harrit. Cheddar cuckoo, no?
Thermxte is his personal opinion also.
The US caused the earthquakes in Haiti is the personal opinion of Jones.
Truthers have lots of opinions but the math and science refuse to bend to them.

 

[Christopher7]

They were perfectly clear. Iron melted and lead was vaporized during the event and the dust was deposited by the dust clouds from the collapses.

So? How much "therm?te" would be needed if you're correct? Would you expect other visual/physical evidence left by that amount?

The deniers tap dance. Never concede a point. Avoid it by asking a question requiring speculation so you can argue ad nauseam.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Many of the materials, such as lead, cadmium, mercury and various organic compounds, vaporized and then condensed during the WTC Event.

Lead Melting point 622oF [328oC]
Boiling point - Vaporization 3182oF [1,750oC]
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/melting-boiling-temperatures-d_392.html

So explain exactly why you think this is indicative of foul play while they do not? Are you better qualified than them?

The buildings were being reduced to dust at the very beginning of the destruction. There was not enough energy in the descending structure to do this. After that, dust cannot turn concrete into dust.

You are mistaken or lying, which is it? Most of the build clearly was not turned to dust (none of the steelwork was for example) and there are plenty of pictures of the large quantity of concrete etc left in large pieces. So a lot of dust was produced......did anyone ever say otherwise??? The building in Brazil that recently collapsed and other building demolished using Verniage show lots of dust too.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

The deniers tap dance. Never concede a point. Avoid it by asking a question requiring speculation so you can argue ad nauseam.

 

[Christopher7]

The buildings were being reduced to dust at the very beginning of the destruction.

Where did you get this idea?

From the videos

There was not enough energy in the descending structure to do this.

Wouldn't it be cool if you could do that math for that.

I cannot but do you really need the math? Do you think the top section could pulverize everything from the very beginning of a "collapse".

After that, dust cannot turn concrete into dust.

Do you think that dust can pulverize concrete?

 

[DGM]

The amount of energy introduced during the generation of the WTC Dust and the ensuing conflagration caused various components to vaporize. Vapor phase components with high boiling point and high melting point would have, as they cooled, tended to form precipitated particles or thin film deposits on available surfaces through condensation mechanisms. The results of this process would be the presence of a thin layer of deposited material on the surfaces of the dust particulate matter. Many of the materials, such as lead, cadmium, mercury and various organic compounds, vaporized and then condensed during the WTC Event.

Let me try to help Chris.

Are you aware there are other ways for temperatures to rise without fire? Have you ever slid down a rope and felt your hands get hot? Was the rope on fire? Do you understand what they could mean by the word "energy" in the bold passage?

 

[NoahFence]

C7....the explosives would never survive more than an instant after impact, making your points irrelevant. You fail.

 

[DGM]

From the videos

I'm seeing lots of energy transfer in those videos. Were building parts being slammed together at very high pressures? If you don't think so, What was creating all the dust?

 

[plague311]

I cannot but do you really need the math? Do you think the top section could pulverize everything from the very beginning of a "collapse".

Pulverize? No, but everything wasn't pulverized, that's just your way of muddying the waters. That's the thing with troofers, the goal posts are all over.

It's all or nothing, unless that doesn't work for the instance your using. Then it could be a little of each, or a lot of everything. Sometimes it's less than the other one, but still more than the third. If that doesn't work, SILVERSTIEN MADE OUT LIKE A BANDIT

 

[Christopher7]

So explain exactly why you think this is indicative of foul play while they do not?

No

Most of the build clearly was not turned to dust

Numerous people remarked that everything had been turned to dust.

(none of the steelwork was for example)

That is about all that wasn't turned to dust.

and there are plenty of pictures of the large quantity of concrete etc left in large pieces.

Near the bottom of the pile. The bottom floors and basement were the only part other than the steel that was not pulverized to dust.

The pulverization started at the very beginning. Watch the videos. It's the same at the beginning as it was all the way down.

 

[Oystein]

...
Oystein is one cool cat.
...

Well thanks ^^ I guess slt admitted that I do some thinking-on-my-own around here.

 

[plague311]

No

Why would he explain something? He obviously has no clue, it's fairly clear that C7 has no idea what he's talking about.

Numerous people remarked that everything had been turned to dust.

Everything? Expect tons of paper, plane\body parts, piles of rubble, and the vehicles surrounding the WTC

That is about all that wasn't turned to dust.

Only the steel of the steel building didn't turn to dust? See above, fail. That's a good fail too, well done. /golfclap

Near the bottom of the pile. The bottom floors and basement were the only part other than the steel that was not pulverized to dust

.

That's....attempt #3? In this one post alone. Not bad when you can contradict yourself 3 times in 1 shot. Over achieving.

The pulverization started at the very beginning. Watch the videos. It's the same at the beginning as it was all the way down.

I have watched the video, and I already displayed your "pulverization." Lie down, don't hurt yourself.

 

[DGM]

The pulverization started at the very beginning. Watch the videos. It's the same at the beginning as it was all the way down.

You're not claiming that all the mass of the floors and contents were moved outside of the foot-print as they fell?

 

[Christopher7]

Are you aware there are other ways for temperatures to rise without fire? Have you ever slid down a rope and felt your hands get hot? Was the rope on fire? Do you understand what they could mean by the word "energy" in the bold passage?

Yes. Are you implying that the dust was 3182^oF due to friction?

 

[DGM]

Yes. Are you implying that the dust was 3182^oF due to friction?

No. Why would it be? Everything was not converted to dust.

Have you ever seen a spark when you hit a nail with a hammer or fire an air-gun?

 

[chrismohr]

Chris7 wrote:
The pulverization started at the very beginning. Watch the videos. It's the same at the beginning as it was all the way down.

This is not true. Watch the towers coming down. At first there is just a little bit of dust coming out, then more, then more still. In an explosive CD, it starts with big dust plumes right away. Here the dust ejections build up because the speed of the collapse is gradually increasing. I did look at the videos. This is what I saw.

 

[Christopher7]

Why would he explain something? He obviously has no clue, it's fairly clear that C7 has no idea what he's talking about.

Kindly return your insults to that dark recess from whence they came.

Numerous people remarked that everything had been reduced to dust. The other stuff you mention was blown outside the building.

The point, which you are ignoring is: The pulverization began at he beginning of the collapse but that could not be the result of the upper portion falling nor can dust turn concrete and everything else to dust.