Merged Molten metal observations

So, if only a small ammount of thermite was needed to melt a small amount of,steel, why do you claim to see a 'wall' of glowing steel feeding a falling stream of glowing steel?

Which is it a small ammount or enough to cause a falling stream and a glowing 'wall'?
 
Java Man said:
That doesn't mean anything. With that statement in mind anything could occur. Even thermite. But guess what you're applying Murphy's Law the wrong way and still not coming up with sufficient reasons to explain the high concentrations of S required. Murphy's Law address points that even in controlled situations things will go wrong and will do so in the worst moment possible. But this scenario is not controlled, so you have to go from an uncontrolled scenario to a "controlled" one with a set of conditions that somehow allow all this to happen and then you still have Murphy's Law which will mess it up in the last possible moment. Making it impossible for the beam to be corroded the way you claim it was.
Click to expand...

How is the world shaking,blow the cover off the whole conspiracy,put Bush and co. in the dock,erudite and full of math draft coming along?
 
Justin39640 said:
No. See highlite. ML can be applied to anything and ruled that day. You also missed the 'chaos' portion of my statement. How can you argue something is impossible with confidence in all that chaos? Based on that the Earth shouldn't have condensed from gasses and dust and we shouldn't be having this discussion. But all the conditions were right in the chaos of the early solar system to allow us to be here today. (Inspired by your molten core = thermXte corrosion theory.) :D
Click to expand...

Well I didn't want to address the chaos statement because I find it rather pathetic that you have to resort to such a mechanism to defend yourself. And on top of that you apply it incorrectly.

If the whole universe still remained in gaseous form and Earth was the only planet "condensed from gases and dust" is a better analogy. As this event with the eroded steel is uncommon. WTC 7 is the Earth in a universe with no planets condensed from gas and dust. It's the steel structure that totally collapses after considerably less fire than other structures which have sustained more fire and partial collapses. It show damage to metal structures which is strange and uncommon. It is trully the Earth in a Universe without planets.

You are not trying to explain very complex phenomenon with chaos theory. You are trying to convince us that rare events are justified by a chaos theory and that is not so.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
So, if only a small ammount of thermite was needed to melt a small amount of,steel, why do you claim to see a 'wall' of glowing steel feeding a falling stream of glowing steel?

Which is it a small ammount or enough to cause a falling stream and a glowing 'wall'?
Click to expand...

Because the wall isn't liquid and isn't falling. If it were liquid it wouldn't be a wall would it? You see the steel is incandescent and parts of it are dripping (were the reaction is taking place). More so you could even add the heat of the fire to the equation, plus some sulfur from the charge and you have an even more damaging effect due to the thermate's sulfur reaction.
 
Java Man said:
Because the wall isn't liquid and isn't falling. If it were liquid it wouldn't be a wall would it? You see the steel is incandescent and parts of it are dripping (were the reaction is taking place). More so you could even add the heat of the fire to the equation, plus some sulfur from the charge and you have an even more damaging effect due to the thermate's sulfur reaction.
Click to expand...

Why don't you just come clean and admit that there is no draft and that you never had any intention to write one because it is beyond your capabilities.
 
dafydd said:
Why don't you just come clean and admit that there is no draft and that you never had any intention to write one because it is beyond your capabilities.
Click to expand...

I've already stated the reason for not putting the draft on the board. I'm sure you're just waiting for a list of points to jump to any of them and far away from this point at hand. I won't give you the pleasure. Put forth the numbers for the reactions required to produce the components involved in the erosion of the beam.
 
Java Man said:
Ok, you've got my attention. Now please explain to us with number the phenomenons that lead to said erosion.
Click to expand...

Who knows? From my understanding the people who studied it can't conclusively say how it exactly happened. They know it wasn't "melted" by exotic demolitions. It was a corrosive attack. It must have been very random seeing there are only a couple of samples from such a vast pile of destruction.
 
Justin39640 said:
Who knows? From my understanding the people who studied it can't conclusively say how it exactly happened. They know it wasn't "melted" by exotic demolitions. It was a corrosive attack. It must have been very random seeing there are only a couple of samples from such a vast pile of destruction.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the WTC 7 had gypsum walls in only very random locations. I though drywall was a common construction element.
 
How much thermite would it take to make all that steel 'incandescent' and form a falling stream of molten steel?
How much energy is there in this Thermite?
 
Java Man said:
So you're saying the WTC 7 had gypsum walls in only very random locations. I though drywall was a common construction element.
Click to expand...

Conditions and material distribution in the pile weren't uniform. A series of coincidences had to occur to get this result. Or... we could be looking at acid rain damage that took years to develop.
 
Java Man said:
I've already stated the reason for not putting the draft on the board. I'm sure you're just waiting for a list of points to jump to any of them and far away from this point at hand. I won't give you the pleasure. Put forth the numbers for the reactions required to produce the components involved in the erosion of the beam.
Click to expand...

Why respond to a fantasy?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
How much thermite would it take to make all that steel 'incandescent' and form a falling stream of molten steel?
How much energy is there in this Thermite?
Click to expand...

Not much really and the energy depends on the thermite. For example iron thermite Fe2O3(s) + 2Al(s) has ΔH = -851.5 kJ/mol. The Heat of fusion for iron is 13.81 kJ·mol−1. That's 62 times the energy per mol.

If we go to copper 3CuO(s) + 2Al(s), ΔH = -1203.8 kJ/mol

and manganese 3MnO2(s) + 4Al(s) ΔH = -1788.7 kJ/mol

So you see one kilo of thermite can melt many kilos of steel, no problem.
 
Justin39640 said:
Conditions and material distribution in the pile weren't uniform. A series of coincidences had to occur to get this result.
Click to expand...

Yea I guess your chaos theory predicts the accumulation of all that gypsum on those "rare spots". As WTC 7 fell all the drywall converged on that one spot. Right!


Justin39640 said:
Or... we could be looking at acid rain damage that took years to develop.
Click to expand...

And it was never found in any inspection? A beam practically disappeared and nobody even noticed a dent on the floor?
 
So why don't they use it in a furnace to melt steel?
Why hasn't it been used in any other demolition or steel cutting application?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom