WTC dust

[WTC Dust]

Please don't ever, ever quote someone like Tesla since you fail at physics.

Tesla was a genius no doubt...but he was wrong about some things...which is understandable considering what we did not understand while he was alive.

If Tesla has been alive today, he would have revised some of his ideas in the face of what we now know.

In contrast, you hold on to insane ideas and failed physics despite the overwhelming evidence against your inane ideas.

Quoting Tesla by any truther is an insult to the mans work and memory.

Please refrain from doing it.

You should be quoting people like Gage or Jones or Woods....they are more in line with you failed, nutty ideas.

Tesla was a real scientist, and real scientists always adjust and revise their ideas based on new knowledge. Do you think Tesla would have been able to comment on HAARP and the other types of directed energy weapons that have been developed, especially since the Star Wars Defense Initiative?

 

[Dave Rogers]

I got an A in physics in high school and a B in physics in college (plus somehow I managed to get an A in college physics lab).

If that's true, you shouldn't have.

I didn't take physics in grad school, but I never failed a single physics class or any class I ever took.

If that's true, you should have.

Dave

 

[WTC Dust]

No Dave.

She has yet to provide a source saying that the first Memorial Service was interrupted....

Color me suprised.....

Look at the picture. Those men are not in formation. I don't need somebody to say words when I have a picture. Words are less reliable than documents. Documents are less reliable than physical evidence.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Yes. Data slide number two shows the dust heterogeneity.

Was this another poor quality photograph of some unidentifiable rubbish?

Dave

ETA: And why did you bother with your other 558 posts so far?

 

[dtugg]

Yes. Data slide number two shows the dust heterogeneity.

"Data slide number two" is so blurry you can't even tell if what is pictured is actually dust.

 

[WTC Dust]

WTC Dust:

It sounds like the piece you got is magnetic. Do you want to guess how many things in todays world have magnets it them? What makes you think it would be unusual to find something like this after the collapse of an office building.

I"m in my office and I can count at least 20 things with magnets in them.

KK. I'm just building my case.

 

[WTC Dust]

Was this another poor quality photograph of some unidentifiable rubbish?

Dave

ETA: And why did you bother with your other 558 posts so far?

The full photograph is actually high quality. But I wanted to save some of my candy for the party on December 1. You will tune in on USTREAM, won't you?

 

[DGM]

KK. I'm just building my case.

So far it looks like your building your case for something unusual from things that would be expected to be there. Have you made any attempt to identify this stuff?

 

[Dave Rogers]

"Data slide number two" is so blurry you can't even tell if what is pictured is actually dust.

Strange, I'd have thought even undergraduate physics courses would teach people the difference between a blurred photograph and a data slide.

Dave

 

[Mikemcc]

I'm not a person who says those flights actually flew on 9/11. Other people are saying this happened, and I can't account for the words of other people.

My work is forensic work, and I automatically discount hearsay evidence.

Since we didn't have other types of evidence that the flights existed, the evidence that they didn't exist is all we have.

We didn't find enough plane parts at any of the attack locations on 9/11 to put together a plane. 4 plane "crashes" but 0 planes? Very strange. Which is why I study forensic evidence instead of hearsay. Who can tell why people say the things they do? I'm not a psychologist.

My bold.

Dear God, please say they don't let you near a court room as an expert witness!?

You've completely failed to provide any evidence to support you mysterious beam weapon, or even the effect that it's based on. Nor have you any context to relate your dust sample to the WTC buildings. LeftySergeant has already given you a likely source of such a structure that you have found, yet you just ignored that. Your failure to describe or quantify this aspect of the Casimir Effect doesn't allow an energy budget to be determined, so fails to show if it's in any way realistic (apart from the minor point that no investigator has looked for, or observed this odd effect!).

Do you realise that if your theory is true it would make an ideal spacecraft engine, a true star-trek style impulse engine. Yet instead of generating vast wealth for themselves by cheaply exploiting the solar system, your conspirators restrict themselves to flattening a couple of buildings to provide an excuse to go to war. The idea is barking.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The full photograph is actually high quality. But I wanted to save some of my candy for the party on December 1. You will tune in on USTREAM, won't you?

I was planning to do something more enjoyable, like hammering a blunt wooden stake into my left eye-socket. If I run out of wooden stakes, maybe I'll consider it.

Dave

 

[tsig]

Here's a quote attributed to Nikola Tesla:

Tesla also claimed that his OSCILLATOR could knock down any building and even split the earth in half:

"So powerful are the effects of the telegeodynamic oscillator", said Tesla in reviewing the subject in the thirties, "that I could go over to the Empire State Building and reduce it to a tangled mass of wreckage in a very short time. I could accomplish this result with utmost certainty and without any difficulty whatever. I would use a small mechanical vibrating device, an engine so small you could slip it in your pocket. I could attach it to any part of the building, start it in operation, allow it twelve or thirteen minutes to come to full resonance. The building would first respond with gentle tremors, and the vibrations would then become so powerful that the whole structure would go into resonant oscillations of such great amplitude and power
that the rivets in the steel beams would be loosened and sheared. The outer stone coating would be thrown off and then the skeleton steel structure would collapse in all its parts. It would take about 2.5 horsepower to drive the oscillator to produce this effect." (O' Neill, Prodigal Genius, p. 165).

I'd be more impressed if he actually did it.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I'm not a person who says those flights actually flew on 9/11. Other people are saying this happened, and I can't account for the words of other people.

My work is forensic work, and I automatically discount hearsay evidence.

Since we didn't have other types of evidence that the flights existed, the evidence that they didn't exist is all we have.

We didn't find enough plane parts at any of the attack locations on 9/11 to put together a plane. 4 plane "crashes" but 0 planes? Very strange. Which is why I study forensic evidence instead of hearsay. Who can tell why people say the things they do? I'm not a psychologist.

That would make the conspiracy huge.

Aircraft construction and parts production is very tightly controlled.

If the 4 aircraft didn't exist that would mean the manufacturers were in on it and all their workers on the production line that signed off their jobs as complete on the airframe.It would mean all the parts manufacturers that signed off parts to that airframe are in on it.
Engine manufacturers would be in on it. They monitor and advise directly on their engines on the earcraft.
All the service companies and their engineers that signed off jobs on those aircraft would be in on it.
All the pilots that have those aircraft in their log books over the years would be in on it, all the airports that the aircraft visited would be in on it.

Records for airliners are very tightly controlled and regulated there are records going back years for the aircraft with a host of companies and organisations.

Where are the aircraft now?
What about all the passengers and aircrew? where did they all go?

 

[WildCat]

I'm my own master in that I'm willing to solicit and accept advice from other people who know better.

That may well be true, but the problem is you think you know better than everyone else.

Have you ever been diagnosed with a mental illness?

 

[tsig]

Obviously, since steel remained, the weapon didn't fully dissociate all of the steel. And, since the dust existed in tiny particles instead of vaporous iron, it didn't even dissociate all of the iron at a micro level.

This is to say that a calculation of fully perfect dissociation of every molecule of iron in the steel beams can give a maximum expansion value, and the expected results in real life would be less than this due to imperfections in implementation.

Why don't you show us how you got to the 250m sphere? I can comment on your calculations.

If you dissociate the molecules you don't have iron anymore.

 

[excaza]

If you dissociate the molecules you don't have iron anymore.

Sure you would.

 

[tsig]

Sure you would.

A molecule is defined as a group of at least two atoms in a definite arrangement held together by covalent chemical bonds.[



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule


This looks like a nomenclature problem.

 

[excaza]

Why don't you show us how you got to the 250m sphere? I can comment on your calculations.

1 kilogram of Iron is 18.182 moles. That's 1.09*10²⁵ atoms of iron. You tell us how big a sphere that's going to make if they're spaced 1 micrometer apart.

 

[excaza]

A molecule is defined as a group of at least two atoms in a definite arrangement held together by covalent chemical bonds.[



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule


This looks like a nomenclature problem.

If you dissociate a molecule you still have the constituents, so you'll still have iron. Iron can form covalent bonds.

 

[Sabrina]

Look at the picture. Those men are not in formation. I don't need somebody to say words when I have a picture. Words are less reliable than documents. Documents are less reliable than physical evidence.

Why would you expect them to remain in formation for the entire length of an EXTREMELY lengthy memorial service? Do you have ANY idea how uncomfortable it is to have to stand still, either at the position of attention or even standing "at ease" (i.e. with your hands clasped at the small of your back and feet approximately shoulder width apart) for any length of time? What is more likely is that the formal portion of the ceremony requiring such was over and, so long as they remained quiet and respectful, the men were then allowed to break formation.

The longest time I have ever remained at attention or in a formation where I wasn't able to move much for fear of disrupting the ceremony was at a brigade change of command ceremony while I was on active duty; total time, less than one hour (and typically during the remarks, we were allowed to rest briefly). How long are the ceremonies on 9/11? At least three hours, if not more. Asking men to stand in formation for that length of time can lead to some serious issues. So I'm sorry, but your personal incredulity that the men and women in uniform at those ceremonies would not remain in formation for the duration of them doesn't fly.