Molten Steel

[Sunstealer]

The biggest problem for thermite is this

WARNING FOR TRUTHERS - THIS CONTAINS SCIENCE, SPECIFICALLY CHEMISTRY AND MATHS.

Stoichiometric thermite requires 2 moles of Al per 1 mole of Fe2O3

2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe

2 moles of Al weigh 54 g
1 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 160 g

density of Al=2.64 g/cc
density of Fe2O3=5.24 g/cc

54 grams of Al is equivalent to 20.5 cc of Al.
160g of Fe2O3 is equivalent to 30.5 cc of Fe2O3

Therefore, 51 cc of fully dense powder of 20.5 cc Al and 30.5 cc Fe2O3 weighs (54+160) g = 214 g.

A volume of 1000 cc would weigh (1000/51)*214 = 4.2 kg

For a powder packing density of 50%, the powder would weigh:

0.5*4.2 kg = 2.1 kg = 4.8 lb

So a litre weighs 4.8lb (2.1Kg).

The mass of the reactants is twice that of the liquid iron produced so 1 litre (2.1Kg) thermite will produce 1.05Kg of liquid iron with a volume of 0.15 Litres (150 cm⁻³) given liquid iron density of 6.98 g·cm⁻³.

Truthers - give a rough ball park figure for either the weight or volume of molten iron that you think was present

or

give a rough indication of how much molten iron from the thermite would be needed to cut columns/beams etc.

We can then do some further calculations.

 

[T.A.M.]

The problems for thermite are many, and the more you explain it to the truthers, the more complex their theories get.

Thermite itself is an excuse they came up with to explain the lack of Detonation sequences seen or heard.

Then they had a problem with how it would be applied so they come up with nanothermite, and patented horizontal thermite applicators, or theories on people dressed up in painter or janitor outfits during powerdowns applying it.

TAM

Edit: oh ya, then there is Max Photon's theory that the thermite was built into the skyscraper prior to its construct (or at least I think that was Max's theory).

 

[TjW]

The problems for thermite are many, and the more you explain it to the truthers, the more complex their theories get.

Thermite itself is an excuse they came up with to explain the lack of Detonation sequences seen or heard.

Then they had a problem with how it would be applied so they come up with nanothermite, and patented horizontal thermite applicators, or theories on people dressed up in painter or janitor outfits during powerdowns applying it.

TAM

Edit: oh ya, then there is Max Photon's theory that the thermite was built into the skyscraper prior to its construct (or at least I think that was Max's theory).

It seems really close to Christophera's theory of C4-coated rebar. I wouldn't give Max much credit for originality.

 

[bill smith]

It seems really close to Christophera's theory of C4-coated rebar. I wouldn't give Max much credit for originality.

Max Photon may not have been as stupid as he sounds.For instance;-

Suppose a builder informs his insurance company that he wants to erect the two biggest Towers in te world right in the centre of lower Manhatten ? His insurance company might have misgivings abut what would happen if one or both of those Towers should fall over for whatever reason on top of all that other billion-dollar prime real estate.

So some bright spark might suggest that secure access hatches to critical structural members be built in during construction with wiring and control included. Then in the event of a pending collapse the explosives could be plugged in and the building could be brought down in a much smaller space causing far less death and destruction and- more importantly- financial liabilty. The wiring could be electronically tested frequently .

What's more they would not go shouting about it from every street corner either for who likes to work in a building that is wired for demolition.

 

[Shalamar]

Max Photon may not have been as stupid as he sounds.For instance;-

Suppose a builder informs his insurance company that he wants to erect the two biggest Towers in te world right in the centre of lower Manhatten ? His insurance company might have misgivings abut what would happen if one or both of those Towers should fall over for whatever reason on top of all that other billion-dollar prime real estate.

So some bright spark might suggest that secure access hatches to critical structural members be built in during construction with wiring and control included. Then in the event of a pending collapse the explosives could be plugged in and the building could be brought down in a much smaller space causing far less death and destruction and- more importantly- financial liabilty. The wiring could be electronically tested frequently .

What's more they would not go shouting about it from every street corner either for who likes to work in a building that is wired for demolition.

Do you have any evidence that the buildings were pre-wired for demolitions? Proof of such would go a long way to advancing the CT hypothesis.

 

[bill smith]

Do you have any evidence that the buildings were pre-wired for demolitions? Proof of such would go a long way to advancing the CT hypothesis.

No this is just a theory but I think it makes fairly good sense and is perfectly logical. I would be more surprised if they had NOT done this.

 

[DGM]

Hey, I liked Max! He was polite and very witty with his humor.

As for his "theory",

 

[Shalamar]

No this is just a theory but I think it makes fairly good sense and is perfectly logical. I would be more surprised if they had NOT done this.

You still need evidence to support the claims. Until the evidence comes forward, the best fit is the official account. The evidence fits the official account, and not an 'inside job' CT.

 

[DGM]

You still need evidence to support the claims. Until the evidence comes forward, the best fit is the official account. The evidence fits the official account, and not an 'inside job' CT.

An obvious problem with his "theory" is that skyscrapers are not strong enough to "fall over" (like trees) on billion dollar real estate. The builders would know this and the plan would be scrapped, (and the originator put in the loony bin).

 

[bill smith]

You still need evidence to support the claims. Until the evidence comes forward, the best fit is the official account. The evidence fits the official account, and not an 'inside job' CT.

It's not a claim but a logical theory that some other may be able to prove. As you say it would be enormously significant if it is true. This theory does not exclude the additional use of thermite - or to be more precise nano-thermite.

 

[Disbelief]

It's not a claim but a logical theory that some other may be able to prove. As you say it would be enormously significant if it is true. This theory does not exclude the additional use of thermite - or to be more precise nano-thermite.

But it does exclude the necessary LOUD explosions that would be the telltale sign of a CD. Especially if you consider the technology when the towers were built.

ETA: Also, you have to explain how the explosives could survive the impact and fires. Then, you have to explain how the people behind this could assess the damage to explosives and the buildings to kow how to set off the remaining charges to properly bring down the buildings. Not really that logical of a theory.

 

[bill smith]

But it does exclude the necessary LOUD explosions that would be the telltale sign of a CD. Especially if you consider the technology when the towers were built.

The hatches would have been built in in the 60's. If the towers were deliberately demolished they would have still given easy discreet access to critical columns and the like and any type of incendiary or epxlosive could have been used. Equally the hatches could hve provided some muffling for sound.

 

[DavidJames]

It's not a claim but a logical theory that some other may be able to prove. As you say it would be enormously significant if it is true. This theory does not exclude the additional use of thermite - or to be more precise nano-thermite.

or to be even more precise, completely made up ****.

 

[Gravy]

I hate to bring up the obvious, but if an insurance company believed a skyscraper was so likely to fall over that pre-wiring it for demolition was a sensible idea, they wouldn't insure it, nor would anyone build it.

Additionally, this absolutely lunatic conspiracy would require the complicity of multiple insurers, developers, dozens of contractors, engineers, inspectors, and everyone who worked on the guts of the building.

 

[BigAl]

It's not a claim but a logical theory that some other may be able to prove. As you say it would be enormously significant if it is true. This theory does not exclude the additional use of thermite - or to be more precise nano-thermite.

When I've read actual citations to actual "nano" products, I have always found phrases like "high brisance" in the description.

"Brisance" is a technical term describing the rate at which explosive compounds explode and "high" would indicate a distinct and loud noise.

No such noise was heard at WTC consistent with man-made demolition.

 

[A W Smith]

The hatches would have been built in in the 60's. If the towers were deliberately demolished they would have still given easy discreet access to critical columns and the like and any type of incendiary or epxlosive could have been used. Equally the hatches could hve provided some muffling for sound.

Well except for the proven fact that the core fell last Hollywood Bill Smith. Making a die hard movie are ya?

 

[Disbelief]

The hatches would have been built in in the 60's. If the towers were deliberately demolished they would have still given easy discreet access to critical columns and the like and any type of incendiary or epxlosive could have been used. Equally the hatches could hve provided some muffling for sound.

Some muffling? Listen to a CD and tell me that you can muffle the sound as it is cutting columns like it is designed to do. If these explosives are supposed to be cutting the columns, how are you going to muffle them? Also, did you miss the ETA from my post above? If so, here it is again:

ETA: Also, you have to explain how the explosives could survive the impact and fires. Then, you have to explain how the people behind this could assess the damage to explosives and the buildings to kow how to set off the remaining charges to properly bring down the buildings. Not really that logical of a theory.

 

[Sunstealer]

Not really that logical of a theory.

It's utterly mad! I don't know whether to laugh or put my head in my hands. It really does show the inside of a truther mind though. Can you imagine the impracticalities of doing this? That one in a million chance that a fire couldn't be fought or a plane smashing into a building so hey lads lets wire the building up just in case!

I don't know how many tons of explosives demolition companies use but could you imagine the risk of these being stolen? An electrical fault could set of charges, explosives have a shelf life, the whole loony plan is fraught with danger.

Imagine the conversation between the insurer and owner of the building! Our premiums should be less because we have tons of explosives in our building!

 

[GlennB]

No this is just a theory but I think it makes fairly good sense and is perfectly logical. I would be more surprised if they had NOT done this.

So you'd imagine that most of the world's extreme high-rise buildings are pre-rigged with demolition charges? Just in case ????

You are either trolling or mentally ill.

 

[Shalamar]

It's not a claim but a logical theory that some other may be able to prove. As you say it would be enormously significant if it is true. This theory does not exclude the additional use of thermite - or to be more precise nano-thermite.

Logic is pointless here. You need evidence. Testimony from the insurance company that the buildings were 'pre-wired', evidence from the building of the towers themselves. Evidence from those who planted the explosives.

In the CT hypothesis there is so much that could have gone wrong, that it is needlessly complex and involves too many people.

The official story makes more sense 'logically': Buildings hit towers. Towers catch fire. Buildings fall down, and damage other buildings.