QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 13 2007, 07:44 PM)
DBB:
And yet, they have positively identified the eight highjackers through DNA recovered from ground zero. Something has always bothered me about this: where/when did the highjackers, prior to 9/11, submit to DNA sampling, for the match from the evidence recovered at GZ?
They did not submit, humans are constantly shedding DNA, hair skin, fingernails secretions, and there were also blood samples available. Some one does not have to submit for a DNA test in person for a match to be established.
There is probably enough DNA on your shirt right now to do a Dna Match on you. Just from it!
It is called DNA replication technology DNA is a self replicating molecule DA. It is the basis of all life!
And yet, they have positively identified the eight highjackers through DNA recovered from ground zero. Something has always bothered me about this: where/when did the highjackers, prior to 9/11, submit to DNA sampling, for the match from the evidence recovered at GZ?
They did not submit, humans are constantly shedding DNA, hair skin, fingernails secretions, and there were also blood samples available. Some one does not have to submit for a DNA test in person for a match to be established.
There is probably enough DNA on your shirt right now to do a Dna Match on you. Just from it!
It is called DNA replication technology DNA is a self replicating molecule DA. It is the basis of all life!
Chainsaw:
I think it's pretty remarkable that they were able to identify anyone in the WTC rubble pile. If you do the math, human remains amounted to only 0.02 % of the mass of the WTC rubble.
In addition, a lot of the rubble was, or became, very hot. DNA is a fragile organic molecule. I doubt that it could survive temperatures much above 200 deg C for more than a few minutes.
In typical aircraft crashes dental records are useful for identification purposes, even if a body is badly burned. But in the case of the occupants of WTC 1 & 2, the crushing and scrambling of body parts would have precluded the use of this technique.
NF
I think it's pretty remarkable that they were able to identify anyone in the WTC rubble pile. If you do the math, human remains amounted to only 0.02 % of the mass of the WTC rubble.
In addition, a lot of the rubble was, or became, very hot. DNA is a fragile organic molecule. I doubt that it could survive temperatures much above 200 deg C for more than a few minutes.
In typical aircraft crashes dental records are useful for identification purposes, even if a body is badly burned. But in the case of the occupants of WTC 1 & 2, the crushing and scrambling of body parts would have precluded the use of this technique.
NF
QUOTE (NEU-FONZE+Feb 14 2007, 02:43 PM)
Chainsaw:
I think it's pretty remarkable that they were able to identify anyone in the WTC rubble pile. If you do the math, human remains amounted to only 0.02 % of the mass of the WTC rubble.
In addition, a lot of the rubble was, or became, very hot. DNA is a fragile organic molecule. I doubt that it could survive temperatures much above 200 deg C for more than a few minutes.
In typical aircraft crashes dental records are useful for identification purposes, even if a body is badly burned. But in the case of the occupants of WTC 1 & 2, the crushing and scrambling of body parts would have precluded the use of this technique.
NF
Not necessarily the DNA, might actually survive in scattered elements, especially in the teeth, that would at least have allowed some of that evidence to be recovered. The thing is not so much in that situation, to provide a body, as to provide evidence of death of an individual.
In fact DNA even in teeth and bone can sometimes be used even in the world trade center conditions, because the debris can insulate the bones and teeth from the heat.
The very fact of Concrete pulverization make DNA survival possible, because it encapsulates the bones and debris fragments in an insulating layer.
Also I have to agree with your previous statement the effects of Oscillations from impact would be localized, and some of the energy would be radiated by the trusses, and the metal reinforcements in the concrete but this might also explain some of the concrete fragmentation effects seen in the videos.
It does not look like the Oscillation, fracture wave model is very promising at this time, if it does not fit the data.
Although I am sure it does fit some parts of the collapse where the materials was not plastic enough to allow the quick formation of plastic henge's though buckling.
I had a buddy of mine an engineer do the same calculations, and he concluded that although the model could account for certain aspects, it was also open to tampering, with slight adjustment of the angle of strike, he got 7/8 g with 1/8 g of resistance.
I think that is an unrealistic G value in the real world.
I do not know if he is using the same model as DBB, but I believe it is similar.
Sorry for wasting your time on it DBB.
I think it's pretty remarkable that they were able to identify anyone in the WTC rubble pile. If you do the math, human remains amounted to only 0.02 % of the mass of the WTC rubble.
In addition, a lot of the rubble was, or became, very hot. DNA is a fragile organic molecule. I doubt that it could survive temperatures much above 200 deg C for more than a few minutes.
In typical aircraft crashes dental records are useful for identification purposes, even if a body is badly burned. But in the case of the occupants of WTC 1 & 2, the crushing and scrambling of body parts would have precluded the use of this technique.
NF
Not necessarily the DNA, might actually survive in scattered elements, especially in the teeth, that would at least have allowed some of that evidence to be recovered. The thing is not so much in that situation, to provide a body, as to provide evidence of death of an individual.
In fact DNA even in teeth and bone can sometimes be used even in the world trade center conditions, because the debris can insulate the bones and teeth from the heat.
The very fact of Concrete pulverization make DNA survival possible, because it encapsulates the bones and debris fragments in an insulating layer.
Also I have to agree with your previous statement the effects of Oscillations from impact would be localized, and some of the energy would be radiated by the trusses, and the metal reinforcements in the concrete but this might also explain some of the concrete fragmentation effects seen in the videos.
It does not look like the Oscillation, fracture wave model is very promising at this time, if it does not fit the data.
Although I am sure it does fit some parts of the collapse where the materials was not plastic enough to allow the quick formation of plastic henge's though buckling.
I had a buddy of mine an engineer do the same calculations, and he concluded that although the model could account for certain aspects, it was also open to tampering, with slight adjustment of the angle of strike, he got 7/8 g with 1/8 g of resistance.
I think that is an unrealistic G value in the real world.
I do not know if he is using the same model as DBB, but I believe it is similar.
Sorry for wasting your time on it DBB.
forthetrees
Your the one talking about "dematerialization" and you call me clueless???
Grumpy
QUOTE
So, looks like you're still pretty much clueless, eh?
Your the one talking about "dematerialization" and you call me clueless???
Grumpy
forthetrees --- What part of 'burnt to small pieces of fine ash" do you fail to understand? 
AceBaker --- I have seen several visuals of floor pans in/at Ground Zero.
Chainsaw, --- I quite enjoyed the exploration of Mathieu functions. I'm still willing to consider some damage do to wave action. After all, there is at least on account of hearing some grinding sound in a sub-basement at the instant of aircraft impact. Moreover, there might well be an unknown and unknowable amount of actual connection fracture near the region of the impact.
I agree with NEU-FONZE that even small damping will restrict most of the possible damage to near the impact. However, once collapse has commenced, vibrations below the crushing front could have helped pre-damage the core, so to speak. Maybe 3 stories worth of connection failures...
AceBaker --- I have seen several visuals of floor pans in/at Ground Zero.
Chainsaw, --- I quite enjoyed the exploration of Mathieu functions. I'm still willing to consider some damage do to wave action. After all, there is at least on account of hearing some grinding sound in a sub-basement at the instant of aircraft impact. Moreover, there might well be an unknown and unknowable amount of actual connection fracture near the region of the impact.
I agree with NEU-FONZE that even small damping will restrict most of the possible damage to near the impact. However, once collapse has commenced, vibrations below the crushing front could have helped pre-damage the core, so to speak. Maybe 3 stories worth of connection failures...
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 13 2007, 02:27 PM)
No, this is more OCT lies and I can prove it.
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/images/...mg_debris_6.jpg
A structural engineer not knowing what he is talking about?
you forgot to post this quote from the same site about building 6.
DAVE PERAZA: Heavy debris from North Tower destroyed the interior of this building, home of a U.S. Customs House, leaving a crater that extended into the basement. Fires burned unchecked for days. A total loss, the building was later demolished.
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/enginee...ildings_12.html
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/images/...mg_debris_6.jpg
A structural engineer not knowing what he is talking about?
you forgot to post this quote from the same site about building 6.
DAVE PERAZA: Heavy debris from North Tower destroyed the interior of this building, home of a U.S. Customs House, leaving a crater that extended into the basement. Fires burned unchecked for days. A total loss, the building was later demolished.
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/enginee...ildings_12.html
QUOTE (einsteen+Feb 12 2007, 03:21 PM)
lozenge124,
I can understand why you have problems with the stepwise model and the usage of the E1 value.
Using an E1 value (that is 0.6GJ) for one storey implies that there is no energy transferred through the columns. I forgot who but someone called it a tuning-fork that is able to transfer sound. It almost looks like measuring with two standards because if a crashing plane transfers a lot of its impact energy the same could be done for a toppling couple of stories. As I said before I’m no fracture wave specialist but both the block and the plane are very extremely random situations. I remember from years ago that a random wave can be thought of as a sum of sinus waves (Fourier) and what makes the one different than the other?
I found another article on this subject by Gordon Ross where he spreads the reaction to the impact of a falling block across a number of stories. It's available on the journal of 9/11 studies site:
Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC1
He starts by looking at the behavior of a steel column under a buckling load:
He then comes up with the number of floors that would feel the impact based on the speed of wave propagation through structural steel.
He then comes up with the number of floors that would feel the impact based on the speed of wave propagation through structural steel.
To shorten the columns of the first impacted storey by 3%, sufficient to complete the plastic shortening phase, a distance of about 0.111 metres, and allowing a constant speed of 8.5 metres per second, would take a minimum of 0.013 seconds.
The speed of the propagation wave through a medium is given by the general formula for wave propagation
Velocity = Square root ( Bulk modulus / Density ),
and for structural steel is of the order of 4500 metres per second.
The propagation wave of the impact force would therefore travel a distance of 58.7 metres in a time of 0.013 seconds. This means that during the time taken in the plastic shortening of the impacted columns, the same force would be felt at a minimum distance of 58.7 metres, or approximately 16 storeys, from the impact.
He then goes on to do a similar analysis to Greening's based on energy and momentum considerations and comes to the conclusion that the collapse would come to a halt:
I'm not sure if this convinces me, but it's an interesting read.
Note: Later, Greening posted a reply to this, and Ross a counter-reply:
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/articles/..._2_Greening.pdf
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/articles/...3_RossReply.pdf
I can understand why you have problems with the stepwise model and the usage of the E1 value.
Using an E1 value (that is 0.6GJ) for one storey implies that there is no energy transferred through the columns. I forgot who but someone called it a tuning-fork that is able to transfer sound. It almost looks like measuring with two standards because if a crashing plane transfers a lot of its impact energy the same could be done for a toppling couple of stories. As I said before I’m no fracture wave specialist but both the block and the plane are very extremely random situations. I remember from years ago that a random wave can be thought of as a sum of sinus waves (Fourier) and what makes the one different than the other?
I found another article on this subject by Gordon Ross where he spreads the reaction to the impact of a falling block across a number of stories. It's available on the journal of 9/11 studies site:
Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC1
He starts by looking at the behavior of a steel column under a buckling load:
QUOTE
Bazant/Zhou [1] show in their analysis that elastic and plastic behaviour of a steel column under a dynamic buckling load can be shown to consist of three distinct phases. These can be shown on a load against vertical deflection graph and consist of an initial elastic phase, a shortening phase and a rapid plastic deformation phase.
He then comes up with the number of floors that would feel the impact based on the speed of wave propagation through structural steel.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Bazant/Zhou [1] show in their analysis that elastic and plastic behaviour of a steel column under a dynamic buckling load can be shown to consist of three distinct phases. These can be shown on a load against vertical deflection graph and consist of an initial elastic phase, a shortening phase and a rapid plastic deformation phase. |
He then comes up with the number of floors that would feel the impact based on the speed of wave propagation through structural steel.
To shorten the columns of the first impacted storey by 3%, sufficient to complete the plastic shortening phase, a distance of about 0.111 metres, and allowing a constant speed of 8.5 metres per second, would take a minimum of 0.013 seconds.
The speed of the propagation wave through a medium is given by the general formula for wave propagation
Velocity = Square root ( Bulk modulus / Density ),
and for structural steel is of the order of 4500 metres per second.
The propagation wave of the impact force would therefore travel a distance of 58.7 metres in a time of 0.013 seconds. This means that during the time taken in the plastic shortening of the impacted columns, the same force would be felt at a minimum distance of 58.7 metres, or approximately 16 storeys, from the impact.
He then goes on to do a similar analysis to Greening's based on energy and momentum considerations and comes to the conclusion that the collapse would come to a halt:
QUOTE
vertical movement of the falling section would be arrested prior to completion of the 3% shortening phase of the impacted columns, and within 0.02 seconds after impact.
I'm not sure if this convinces me, but it's an interesting read.
Note: Later, Greening posted a reply to this, and Ross a counter-reply:
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/articles/..._2_Greening.pdf
http://worldtradecentertruth.com/articles/...3_RossReply.pdf
lozenge124 --- The problem with GR's analysis is that it assumes perfect symmetry. In fact, the core column members at the collapse initiation floors were significantly imperfect, i.e., not vertical. That significantly changes the relevant analysis.
QUOTE (NEU-FONZE+Feb 14 2007, 01:21 AM)
The impact of the upper block of floors on the lower block may also be treated as a heavily damped vibration.........
This is where Cherepanov and Ross have it all wrong. The energy radiated as an elastic compression wave into the structure below was a small percentage of the impact energy.
Most of the impact damage
WAS LOCAL.
NF
How do you come to the conclusion that the impact damage is mostly local? (I assume that by this you mean 1-floor). Do you not see the impact being absorbed by the columns?
This is where Cherepanov and Ross have it all wrong. The energy radiated as an elastic compression wave into the structure below was a small percentage of the impact energy.
Most of the impact damage
WAS LOCAL.
NF
How do you come to the conclusion that the impact damage is mostly local? (I assume that by this you mean 1-floor). Do you not see the impact being absorbed by the columns?
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 14 2007, 09:35 PM)
lozenge124 --- The problem with GR's analysis is that it assumes perfect symmetry. In fact, the core column members at the collapse initiation floors were significantly imperfect, i.e., not vertical. That significantly changes the relevant analysis.
Aha! I can now post pictures.
I agree that there are extremely complex issues surrounding collapse initiation. That is why in all these simplified "block falling" models (Ross, Greening etc), the assumption is made that magically, a horizontal gap is created in the tower at the level the plane impacted. This actually works in the favor of the gravitational collapse theory, because this is an absolute worse case scenario where all support for the upper block is removed simultaneously, and a gap of 1 floor height is created.
Now, we know that the block on the right comes down at free fall speed. How the heck can the block on the left, crush through the massive amount of steel and concrete below it, and reach the ground in a comparable amount of time?
Aha! I can now post pictures.
I agree that there are extremely complex issues surrounding collapse initiation. That is why in all these simplified "block falling" models (Ross, Greening etc), the assumption is made that magically, a horizontal gap is created in the tower at the level the plane impacted. This actually works in the favor of the gravitational collapse theory, because this is an absolute worse case scenario where all support for the upper block is removed simultaneously, and a gap of 1 floor height is created.
Now, we know that the block on the right comes down at free fall speed. How the heck can the block on the left, crush through the massive amount of steel and concrete below it, and reach the ground in a comparable amount of time?
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 14 2007, 09:58 PM)
Now, we know that the block on the right comes down at free fall speed. How the heck can the block on the left, crush through the massive amount of steel and concrete below it, and reach the ground in a comparable amount of time?
A simplified, acceleration only, equation for WTC 1 agrees best with the data with an acceleration of (2/3)g. Incidentally, this holds true for the first 0.8 seconds and also for the entire 3.0 seconds of data. So no 1 story gap is required.
Using d = (1/2)at^2 for fixed distance d and for the two accelerations g and (2/3)g, we see that in the second case the time t is longer by sqrt(3/2) = 1.224, i.e., 22% longer.
Does this answer your question?
A simplified, acceleration only, equation for WTC 1 agrees best with the data with an acceleration of (2/3)g. Incidentally, this holds true for the first 0.8 seconds and also for the entire 3.0 seconds of data. So no 1 story gap is required.
Using d = (1/2)at^2 for fixed distance d and for the two accelerations g and (2/3)g, we see that in the second case the time t is longer by sqrt(3/2) = 1.224, i.e., 22% longer.
Does this answer your question?
Archaeologists are probably upset.
I'm sure there are many 911 family members that would like the construction of the "Freedom Towers" stopped.
A state of the art, archeologist's dig should be completed before any more construction and "no bid contracts" go out to the "neocon buddy boys."
Yes, the archaeologists have a valid complaint to the scientific community.
Huge argument for "Historic Preservation" of the WTC site. Bodies don't evaporate, and the families deserve a complete, state of the art, search, study, for return and proper burial of the remains.
Forensic Science -Dead men do tell tales.
Stop the construction now!
Medical Science-Cancer cluster identified, but more study into the reason is needed.
Let's talk about good for all the sciences.
Talk about those slacker, shill, Physics geeks!
The Physics geeks are lagging.
Come on! Do the study and let the chips fall where they may! Do it! Do it now!
I'm sure there are many 911 family members that would like the construction of the "Freedom Towers" stopped.
A state of the art, archeologist's dig should be completed before any more construction and "no bid contracts" go out to the "neocon buddy boys."
Yes, the archaeologists have a valid complaint to the scientific community.
Huge argument for "Historic Preservation" of the WTC site. Bodies don't evaporate, and the families deserve a complete, state of the art, search, study, for return and proper burial of the remains.
Forensic Science -Dead men do tell tales.
Stop the construction now!
Medical Science-Cancer cluster identified, but more study into the reason is needed.
Let's talk about good for all the sciences.
Talk about those slacker, shill, Physics geeks!
The Physics geeks are lagging.
Come on! Do the study and let the chips fall where they may! Do it! Do it now!
lozenge124 --- Thinking a bit about GR's analysis, I don't see where he takes into account that during the 3% plastic compression, or shortening, phase, that the energy required to shorten the steel columns is unavailable to provide pressure further down.
As I have said before, GR doesn't seem able to conserve energy properly...
As I have said before, GR doesn't seem able to conserve energy properly...
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 14 2007, 10:15 PM)
A simplified, acceleration only, equation for WTC 1 agrees best with the data with an acceleration of (2/3)g. Incidentally, this holds true for the first 0.8 seconds and also for the entire 3.0 seconds of data. So no 1 story gap is required.
Using d = (1/2)at^2 for fixed distance d and for the two accelerations g and (2/3)g, we see that in the second case the time t is longer by sqrt(3/2) = 1.224, i.e., 22% longer.
Does this answer your question?
Of course it doesn't. And I think you know it.
For the nth time, this 2/3g is based on Greening's flawed E1 model, where each floor absorbs the brunt of the impact of the falling block and no energy is transferred through the columns (core or perimeter).
Instead of posting little math snippets in your posts (with 3 or more decimals), without explaining the models or assumptions behind them, why don't you write up a paper and post it online somewhere (doesn't have to be peer reviewed). Honestly, you just appear to deliberately be trying to obfuscate things.
Using d = (1/2)at^2 for fixed distance d and for the two accelerations g and (2/3)g, we see that in the second case the time t is longer by sqrt(3/2) = 1.224, i.e., 22% longer.
Does this answer your question?
Of course it doesn't. And I think you know it.
For the nth time, this 2/3g is based on Greening's flawed E1 model, where each floor absorbs the brunt of the impact of the falling block and no energy is transferred through the columns (core or perimeter).
Instead of posting little math snippets in your posts (with 3 or more decimals), without explaining the models or assumptions behind them, why don't you write up a paper and post it online somewhere (doesn't have to be peer reviewed). Honestly, you just appear to deliberately be trying to obfuscate things.
@DBB:
If you think a progressive collapse is so easy to achieve, why not prove it by taking up Jim Hoffman's "progressive collapse challenge":
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html
If you think a progressive collapse is so easy to achieve, why not prove it by taking up Jim Hoffman's "progressive collapse challenge":
QUOTE
CHALLENGE #1:
Build a structure with a vertical aspect ratio of at least 2 (twice as tall as it is wide) and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #2:
Build a structure with a square footprint and a vertical aspect ratio of at least 6.5 (6.5 times as high as it is wide), and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #3:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which, in the process of collapsing, will throw pieces outward in all directions such that at least 80% of the mass of the materials ends up lying outside of the footprint, but their center of mass lies inside the footprint.
CHALLENGE #4:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which is capable of remaining intact in 100 MPH cross wind.
CHALLENGE #5:
Build a structure that meets the requirements of both CHALLENGES #3 and #4.
Build a structure with a vertical aspect ratio of at least 2 (twice as tall as it is wide) and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #2:
Build a structure with a square footprint and a vertical aspect ratio of at least 6.5 (6.5 times as high as it is wide), and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #3:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which, in the process of collapsing, will throw pieces outward in all directions such that at least 80% of the mass of the materials ends up lying outside of the footprint, but their center of mass lies inside the footprint.
CHALLENGE #4:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which is capable of remaining intact in 100 MPH cross wind.
CHALLENGE #5:
Build a structure that meets the requirements of both CHALLENGES #3 and #4.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 14 2007, 11:07 PM)
For the nth time, this 2/3g is based on Greening's flawed E1 model ...
NO! YOU DON"T READ SO GOOD!
The (2/3)g comes from taking the equation
d = (1/2)at^2
and finding the best value of the acceleration a which matches the MEASURED drop data.
THERE IS NO ENERGY BEING CONSIDERED!
=============================================
The above equation is too simple to be realistic, but offers a simple enough explanation for why the collapse time is only about 22% longer than for free fall.
If you do not understand my maths, please ask about it. Do not make assumptions.
This is a physics forum and so, until proven otherwise, I assume posters can stand a little maths.
Edited to add: It is clear that Jiff Hoffman is no engineer! No historian. The Venice Campanile, early 20th century progressive collapse. The pyramid at Meidum progressively collapse about 6000 years ago. Jeez.
NO! YOU DON"T READ SO GOOD!
The (2/3)g comes from taking the equation
d = (1/2)at^2
and finding the best value of the acceleration a which matches the MEASURED drop data.
THERE IS NO ENERGY BEING CONSIDERED!
=============================================
The above equation is too simple to be realistic, but offers a simple enough explanation for why the collapse time is only about 22% longer than for free fall.
If you do not understand my maths, please ask about it. Do not make assumptions.
This is a physics forum and so, until proven otherwise, I assume posters can stand a little maths.
Edited to add: It is clear that Jiff Hoffman is no engineer!
No historian. The Venice Campanile, early 20th century progressive collapse. The pyramid at Meidum progressively collapse about 6000 years ago. Jeez.
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 14 2007, 11:15 PM)
NO! YOU DON"T READ SO GOOD!
The (2/3)g comes from taking the equation
d = (1/2)at^2
and finding the best value of the acceleration a which matches the MEASURED drop data.
THERE IS NO ENERGY BEING CONSIDERED!
=============================================
The above equation is too simple to be realistic, but offers a simple enough explanation for why the collapse time is only about 22% longer than for free fall.
If you do not understand my maths, please ask about it. Do not make assumptions.
This is a physics forum and so, until proven otherwise, I assume posters can stand a little maths.
Oh Bravo!
So your answer to the question:
"How the heck can the block on the left, crush through the massive amount of steel and concrete below it, and reach the ground in a comparable amount of time?"
Is: the observed time of collapse is consistent with 2/3g.
Brilliant, thanks!
The (2/3)g comes from taking the equation
d = (1/2)at^2
and finding the best value of the acceleration a which matches the MEASURED drop data.
THERE IS NO ENERGY BEING CONSIDERED!
=============================================
The above equation is too simple to be realistic, but offers a simple enough explanation for why the collapse time is only about 22% longer than for free fall.
If you do not understand my maths, please ask about it. Do not make assumptions.
This is a physics forum and so, until proven otherwise, I assume posters can stand a little maths.
Oh Bravo!
So your answer to the question:
"How the heck can the block on the left, crush through the massive amount of steel and concrete below it, and reach the ground in a comparable amount of time?"
Is: the observed time of collapse is consistent with 2/3g.
Brilliant, thanks!
QUOTE (Capracus+Feb 14 2007, 02:02 PM)
Nothing personal meant by the suggestive quotes, I just got carried away with playing in the gutter with reasonwhy.
This picture is an example of a CD that would put any professional demolitionist out of business.
Just a tad bit too much collateral damage.
I think they got it just right. If you look from the same vantage, 6 months later, 7 out of 7 WTC buildings are gone. Nothing left but raw, developable real estate. Any guesses what that is worth in downtown Manhattan? The most expensive real estate on the planet is downtown Tokyo. #2 is....you guessed it, Manhattan.
This picture is an example of a CD that would put any professional demolitionist out of business.
Just a tad bit too much collateral damage.
I think they got it just right. If you look from the same vantage, 6 months later, 7 out of 7 WTC buildings are gone. Nothing left but raw, developable real estate. Any guesses what that is worth in downtown Manhattan? The most expensive real estate on the planet is downtown Tokyo. #2 is....you guessed it, Manhattan.
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 14 2007, 11:25 PM)
"How the heck can the block on the left, crush through the massive amount of steel and concrete below it, and reach the ground in a comparable amount of time?"
Is: the observed time of collapse is consistent with 2/3g.
Brilliant, thanks!
You are welcome.
At least we have some progress. We'll agree to disagree about what 'comparable amount of time' is to mean. Strictly speaking, any two measured times are comparable in the sense that they can be compared.
But for me, 22% longer is much longer than just free fall and is not nearly free fall. Perhaps a small point.
Now for the 'how the heck' part: First of all, we need to take into account all the principles of physics. In doing so, we obtain the crush-down equation. Greening obtained this first using a discrete model. Bazant & Verdure came along later with the differential equation form. In either case, the basics are so simple that we only need consider the energy consumed divided by the mass at each elevation. For simplicity, assume this ratio is constant for the 3.0 seconds of measured drops. We then obtain a value for this mass specific energy consumption of about 330 J/kg due to the approximately (1/3)g of resistive force. This value is obtained, again, by the best fit to the measured drops.
So we now are reasonably certain about the resistance actually offered, at each stage of the collapse, by the structure. It remains only to detail the mechanisms for consuming this much energy. I went through that in an earlier post.
But the only part that really matters is the weakest link in the design of the structure: the connections of the trusses to the core and to the exterior wall. Once these failed, further collapse was ensured.
Stated another way, the towers were designed to stand up under their static and dynamic loads, up to a wind speed of 98 mph. Once sufficiently overstressed, they began to fall. The towers were not designed to have very heavy weights falling on them. They fell down.
What more do you need? (This is not sarcastic. These progressive collapses are somewhat difficult to comprehend. I've been at it for about a year now...)
Is: the observed time of collapse is consistent with 2/3g.
Brilliant, thanks!
You are welcome.
At least we have some progress. We'll agree to disagree about what 'comparable amount of time' is to mean. Strictly speaking, any two measured times are comparable in the sense that they can be compared.But for me, 22% longer is much longer than just free fall and is not nearly free fall. Perhaps a small point.
Now for the 'how the heck' part: First of all, we need to take into account all the principles of physics. In doing so, we obtain the crush-down equation. Greening obtained this first using a discrete model. Bazant & Verdure came along later with the differential equation form. In either case, the basics are so simple that we only need consider the energy consumed divided by the mass at each elevation. For simplicity, assume this ratio is constant for the 3.0 seconds of measured drops. We then obtain a value for this mass specific energy consumption of about 330 J/kg due to the approximately (1/3)g of resistive force. This value is obtained, again, by the best fit to the measured drops.
So we now are reasonably certain about the resistance actually offered, at each stage of the collapse, by the structure. It remains only to detail the mechanisms for consuming this much energy. I went through that in an earlier post.
But the only part that really matters is the weakest link in the design of the structure: the connections of the trusses to the core and to the exterior wall. Once these failed, further collapse was ensured.
Stated another way, the towers were designed to stand up under their static and dynamic loads, up to a wind speed of 98 mph. Once sufficiently overstressed, they began to fall. The towers were not designed to have very heavy weights falling on them. They fell down.
What more do you need? (This is not sarcastic. These progressive collapses are somewhat difficult to comprehend. I've been at it for about a year now...)
lozenge124
Other than at initiation the core and outer frame had little to nothing to do with resistence to collapse. The outer frame was completely bypassed due to the tilt and wedging in of the top block, the core was seperated at the "hinge point" so that the core of the bottom section was no longer bearing on the core of the top block. The core then becomes a series of single columns penetrating"punching" through thefloors and other rubble of that top block.
Which leaves the floors taking the initial brunt of the falling top section. Due to the relatively fragile floor supports the floors quickly failed, leaving inner and outer frames unsupported and unbraced, a condition they were not designed for. As the top block continued down the outer frame bent outward, requiring little energy to completely fail. That leaves only the core providing the only real resistence to collapse. Since the core beams were no longer coupled to those of the top block that resistence was minimal. Therefore the resistence was able to slow the collapse by 1/3, as established by observation.
As for those like Gordon Ross, whose calculations have the collapse stopping, the collapse did not stop, go back to the calculator, something is wrong with your math, it does not fit with what really happened.
Grumpy
QUOTE
For the nth time, this 2/3g is based on Greening's flawed E1 model, where each floor absorbs the brunt of the impact of the falling block and no energy is transferred through the columns (core or perimeter).
Other than at initiation the core and outer frame had little to nothing to do with resistence to collapse. The outer frame was completely bypassed due to the tilt and wedging in of the top block, the core was seperated at the "hinge point" so that the core of the bottom section was no longer bearing on the core of the top block. The core then becomes a series of single columns penetrating"punching" through thefloors and other rubble of that top block.
Which leaves the floors taking the initial brunt of the falling top section. Due to the relatively fragile floor supports the floors quickly failed, leaving inner and outer frames unsupported and unbraced, a condition they were not designed for. As the top block continued down the outer frame bent outward, requiring little energy to completely fail. That leaves only the core providing the only real resistence to collapse. Since the core beams were no longer coupled to those of the top block that resistence was minimal. Therefore the resistence was able to slow the collapse by 1/3, as established by observation.
As for those like Gordon Ross, whose calculations have the collapse stopping, the collapse did not stop, go back to the calculator, something is wrong with your math, it does not fit with what really happened.
Grumpy
QUOTE (Grumpy+Feb 14 2007, 04:44 PM)
forthetrees
Your the one talking about "dematerialization" and you call me clueless???
Grumpy
Let me help you out with this a bit.
There is no identifiable trace of over 1,000 people. They are completely and totally gone. All of the "material" which comprised their physical existence was instantaneously reduced to a state where no trace of them in the slightest bit could be found. One second they are a living, breathing human being, and a few seconds later their entire body...bone, teeth, ligaments, tendons, etc. is reduced to essentially microscopic, or near microscopic proportions.
This happened in about 10 seconds or so when the only available force to "dematerialize" 1,000 people is gravity powered rubble.
It takes energy, a lot of energy, to completely destroy a human body. A falling pile of rubble will do many horrible things to a body, but reducing it to near microscopic proportions in a couple of seconds is not one of them. Let alone doing it over 1,000 times.
Think its easy to make a body totally disappear? From Wiki -
Two hours at 1,400 to 2,100 degrees F in a specially designed chamber to assist the combustion process. Even at the end of two hours the remains have to be sifted through to make sure the pieces are small enough with more heat being applied for additional time as necessary. And you guys throw out rediculous and laughable statements about how gravity powered rubble did this work in a couple of seconds.
My questions remain:
-what was the force? - falling rubble, or something else?
-where did it come from? - gravity or something else?
-how was it applied? - smashed & bashed them to smithereens or something else?
So far all I've gotten is that gravity powered falling rubble smashed & bashed 1,000 people into too tiny of bits to be found....and another 1,000 or so into pieces so small that identification could only be done via DNA. You guys sticking with that as your explanation?
Oh, and from the Chief Medical Examiner:
Two hours at 1,400 to 2,100 degrees F in a specially designed chamber to assist the combustion process. Even at the end of two hours the remains have to be sifted through to make sure the pieces are small enough with more heat being applied for additional time as necessary. And you guys throw out rediculous and laughable statements about how gravity powered rubble did this work in a couple of seconds.
My questions remain:
-what was the force? - falling rubble, or something else?
-where did it come from? - gravity or something else?
-how was it applied? - smashed & bashed them to smithereens or something else?
So far all I've gotten is that gravity powered falling rubble smashed & bashed 1,000 people into too tiny of bits to be found....and another 1,000 or so into pieces so small that identification could only be done via DNA. You guys sticking with that as your explanation?
Oh, and from the Chief Medical Examiner:
But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry response two weeks ago when he told grieving relatives that many bodies _ no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification.
We know know that number to be in excess of 1,000...that's a lot more that can be accounted for from the impact of the plane or the fires, and it is a lot of work for gravity powered rubble to accomplish in a couple of seconds.
Your the one talking about "dematerialization" and you call me clueless???
Grumpy
Let me help you out with this a bit.
There is no identifiable trace of over 1,000 people. They are completely and totally gone. All of the "material" which comprised their physical existence was instantaneously reduced to a state where no trace of them in the slightest bit could be found. One second they are a living, breathing human being, and a few seconds later their entire body...bone, teeth, ligaments, tendons, etc. is reduced to essentially microscopic, or near microscopic proportions.
This happened in about 10 seconds or so when the only available force to "dematerialize" 1,000 people is gravity powered rubble.
It takes energy, a lot of energy, to completely destroy a human body. A falling pile of rubble will do many horrible things to a body, but reducing it to near microscopic proportions in a couple of seconds is not one of them. Let alone doing it over 1,000 times.
Think its easy to make a body totally disappear? From Wiki -
QUOTE
The box containing the body is placed in the retort and incinerated at a temperature of 760 to 1150 °C (1400 to 2100 °F). ...The entire process usually takes about two hours.
Two hours at 1,400 to 2,100 degrees F in a specially designed chamber to assist the combustion process. Even at the end of two hours the remains have to be sifted through to make sure the pieces are small enough with more heat being applied for additional time as necessary. And you guys throw out rediculous and laughable statements about how gravity powered rubble did this work in a couple of seconds.
My questions remain:
-what was the force? - falling rubble, or something else?
-where did it come from? - gravity or something else?
-how was it applied? - smashed & bashed them to smithereens or something else?
So far all I've gotten is that gravity powered falling rubble smashed & bashed 1,000 people into too tiny of bits to be found....and another 1,000 or so into pieces so small that identification could only be done via DNA. You guys sticking with that as your explanation?
Oh, and from the Chief Medical Examiner:
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The box containing the body is placed in the retort and incinerated at a temperature of 760 to 1150 °C (1400 to 2100 °F). ...The entire process usually takes about two hours. |
Two hours at 1,400 to 2,100 degrees F in a specially designed chamber to assist the combustion process. Even at the end of two hours the remains have to be sifted through to make sure the pieces are small enough with more heat being applied for additional time as necessary. And you guys throw out rediculous and laughable statements about how gravity powered rubble did this work in a couple of seconds.
My questions remain:
-what was the force? - falling rubble, or something else?
-where did it come from? - gravity or something else?
-how was it applied? - smashed & bashed them to smithereens or something else?
So far all I've gotten is that gravity powered falling rubble smashed & bashed 1,000 people into too tiny of bits to be found....and another 1,000 or so into pieces so small that identification could only be done via DNA. You guys sticking with that as your explanation?
Oh, and from the Chief Medical Examiner:
But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry response two weeks ago when he told grieving relatives that many bodies _ no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification.
We know know that number to be in excess of 1,000...that's a lot more that can be accounted for from the impact of the plane or the fires, and it is a lot of work for gravity powered rubble to accomplish in a couple of seconds.
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 14 2007, 11:43 PM)
What more do you need? (This is not sarcastic. These progressive collapses are somewhat difficult to comprehend. I've been at it for about a year now...)
I need you to take up this challenge :
The Progressive Collapse Challenge
You've heard that the Twin Towers pancaked, crushing themselves completely. The experts gave us a fancy-sounding term for this: progressive collapse . If you search with the phrase "progressive collapse" you will find numerous articles, most of them written since 9/11/01 about things like assessing and retrofitting existing structures against progressive collapse. It seems that the only examples of progressive collapse of buildings cited are the Twin Towers, Building 7, and the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
A TV documentary which purported to explain the collapses of the Twin Towers featured a demonstration in which a house-of-cards like structure representing one of the towers was supposed to collapse from the top down. The documentary showed only the beginning of this simulated building collapse, since the producers were apparently unable to achieve progressive total collapse. This raises the question: If this newly discovered mode of structural failure is so likely to happen, why is it so difficult to reproduce?
THE PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE CHALLENGE
The challenge is in 5 parts, from the easiest to the most difficult.
All five require building a structure that will undergo top-down progressive total collapse -- i.e.: when disturbed near the top, it will collapse from the top down to the bottom, leaving no part standing. The disturbance can include mechanical force, such as projectile impacts, and fires, augmented with hydrocarbon fuels. Explosives and electromagnetic energy beams are not permitted.
Your structure can be made out of anything: straws, toothpicks, cards, dominoes, mud, vegetables, pancakes, etc.
The designers of the Twin Towers were able to meet all 5 challenges using steel and concrete.
CHALLENGE #1:
Build a structure with a vertical aspect ratio of at least 2 (twice as tall as it is wide) and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #2:
Build a structure with a square footprint and a vertical aspect ratio of at least 6.5 (6.5 times as high as it is wide), and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #3:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which, in the process of collapsing, will throw pieces outward in all directions such that at least 80% of the mass of the materials ends up lying outside of the footprint, but their center of mass lies inside the footprint.
CHALLENGE #4:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which is capable of remaining intact in 100 MPH cross wind.
CHALLENGE #5:
Build a structure that meets the requirements of both CHALLENGES #3 and #4.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html
I need you to take up this challenge :
QUOTE
The Progressive Collapse Challenge
You've heard that the Twin Towers pancaked, crushing themselves completely. The experts gave us a fancy-sounding term for this: progressive collapse . If you search with the phrase "progressive collapse" you will find numerous articles, most of them written since 9/11/01 about things like assessing and retrofitting existing structures against progressive collapse. It seems that the only examples of progressive collapse of buildings cited are the Twin Towers, Building 7, and the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
A TV documentary which purported to explain the collapses of the Twin Towers featured a demonstration in which a house-of-cards like structure representing one of the towers was supposed to collapse from the top down. The documentary showed only the beginning of this simulated building collapse, since the producers were apparently unable to achieve progressive total collapse. This raises the question: If this newly discovered mode of structural failure is so likely to happen, why is it so difficult to reproduce?
THE PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE CHALLENGE
The challenge is in 5 parts, from the easiest to the most difficult.
All five require building a structure that will undergo top-down progressive total collapse -- i.e.: when disturbed near the top, it will collapse from the top down to the bottom, leaving no part standing. The disturbance can include mechanical force, such as projectile impacts, and fires, augmented with hydrocarbon fuels. Explosives and electromagnetic energy beams are not permitted.
Your structure can be made out of anything: straws, toothpicks, cards, dominoes, mud, vegetables, pancakes, etc.
The designers of the Twin Towers were able to meet all 5 challenges using steel and concrete.
CHALLENGE #1:
Build a structure with a vertical aspect ratio of at least 2 (twice as tall as it is wide) and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #2:
Build a structure with a square footprint and a vertical aspect ratio of at least 6.5 (6.5 times as high as it is wide), and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.
CHALLENGE #3:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which, in the process of collapsing, will throw pieces outward in all directions such that at least 80% of the mass of the materials ends up lying outside of the footprint, but their center of mass lies inside the footprint.
CHALLENGE #4:
Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which is capable of remaining intact in 100 MPH cross wind.
CHALLENGE #5:
Build a structure that meets the requirements of both CHALLENGES #3 and #4.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html
forthetrees --- Not only was each tower falling at about 50 m/s when it hit the bottom, but then there was a fire which burned hotly for weeks.
The M.D. clearly used the wrong term. Not 'vaporized', but ground up and burnt.
The M.D. clearly used the wrong term. Not 'vaporized', but ground up and burnt.
forthetrees
That is a complete load of horse dung!!! What evidence do you have that the destruction of those bodies only took seconds. The recovery of human remains took MONTHS, and even then more remains were found in hidden places 5 YEARS after the events. During the first 6 MONTHS underground temps of ~ 1000 deg C were seen. You, yourself point out...
That is a complete load of horse dung!!! What evidence do you have that the destruction of those bodies only took seconds. The recovery of human remains took MONTHS, and even then more remains were found in hidden places 5 YEARS after the events. During the first 6 MONTHS underground temps of ~ 1000 deg C were seen. You, yourself point out...
Two hours at 1,400 to 2,100 degrees F in a specially designed chamber to assist the combustion process. Even at the end of two hours the remains have to be sifted through to make sure the pieces are small enough with more heat being applied for additional time as necessary. And you guys throw out rediculous and laughable statements about how gravity powered rubble did this work in a couple of seconds.
...The entire process usually takes about two hours.
How many two hour periods are in 6 MONTHS...about 2200!!! Yet you think all the bodies should be intact??? After undergoing the crematory process 2200 times each!!!
I ask again, are you really that stupid??? I find it hard to believe!!!
Grumpy
Yes, but the creation of the remains took only the time it took for the buildings to fall....about 10 seconds.
Yes, but the creation of the remains took only the time it took for the buildings to fall....about 10 seconds.
Yet you think all the bodies should be intact???
Oh sure... and alive, too, eh? There's a lot of ground between intact and no trace.
Gravity powered rubble is the only force you've got to explain how 1,000 bodies were vaporized in a few seconds. DBB keeps trying to bring in post collapse fires as the reason, but that's a real stretch, imho.
QUOTE
There is no identifiable trace of over 1,000 people. They are completely and totally gone. All of the "material" which comprised their physical existence was instantaneously reduced to a state where no trace of them in the slightest bit could be found. One second they are a living, breathing human being, and a few seconds later their entire body...bone, teeth, ligaments, tendons, etc. is reduced to essentially microscopic, or near microscopic proportions.
This happened in about 10 seconds or so when the only available force to "dematerialize" 1,000 people is gravity powered rubble.
This happened in about 10 seconds or so when the only available force to "dematerialize" 1,000 people is gravity powered rubble.
That is a complete load of horse dung!!! What evidence do you have that the destruction of those bodies only took seconds. The recovery of human remains took MONTHS, and even then more remains were found in hidden places 5 YEARS after the events. During the first 6 MONTHS underground temps of ~ 1000 deg C were seen. You, yourself point out...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| There is no identifiable trace of over 1,000 people. They are completely and totally gone. All of the "material" which comprised their physical existence was instantaneously reduced to a state where no trace of them in the slightest bit could be found. One second they are a living, breathing human being, and a few seconds later their entire body...bone, teeth, ligaments, tendons, etc. is reduced to essentially microscopic, or near microscopic proportions. This happened in about 10 seconds or so when the only available force to "dematerialize" 1,000 people is gravity powered rubble. |
That is a complete load of horse dung!!! What evidence do you have that the destruction of those bodies only took seconds. The recovery of human remains took MONTHS, and even then more remains were found in hidden places 5 YEARS after the events. During the first 6 MONTHS underground temps of ~ 1000 deg C were seen. You, yourself point out...
QUOTE
The box containing the body is placed in the retort and incinerated at a temperature of 760 to 1150 °C (1400 to 2100 °F). ...The entire process usually takes about two hours.
Two hours at 1,400 to 2,100 degrees F in a specially designed chamber to assist the combustion process. Even at the end of two hours the remains have to be sifted through to make sure the pieces are small enough with more heat being applied for additional time as necessary. And you guys throw out rediculous and laughable statements about how gravity powered rubble did this work in a couple of seconds.
...The entire process usually takes about two hours.
How many two hour periods are in 6 MONTHS...about 2200!!! Yet you think all the bodies should be intact??? After undergoing the crematory process 2200 times each!!!
I ask again, are you really that stupid??? I find it hard to believe!!!
Grumpy
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 15 2007, 12:36 AM)
I need you to take up this challenge ...
I'll forgo the pleasure. If you read the introduction to the Bazant & Verdure paper you will find a list of structures which had previously undergone progressive collapse. To that list I will add two more:
The pyramid at Meidum (maybe the very first progressive collapse),
Utrecht cathedral, ca 1750.
But come to think of it, the great cathedral at Rheims fell down about three times before they finally figured out how to get it to stand up. Does that count?
I'll forgo the pleasure. If you read the introduction to the Bazant & Verdure paper you will find a list of structures which had previously undergone progressive collapse. To that list I will add two more:
The pyramid at Meidum (maybe the very first progressive collapse),
Utrecht cathedral, ca 1750.
But come to think of it, the great cathedral at Rheims fell down about three times before they finally figured out how to get it to stand up. Does that count?
QUOTE
The recovery of human remains took MONTHS, and even then more remains were found in hidden places 5 YEARS after the events.
Yes, but the creation of the remains took only the time it took for the buildings to fall....about 10 seconds.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The recovery of human remains took MONTHS, and even then more remains were found in hidden places 5 YEARS after the events. |
Yes, but the creation of the remains took only the time it took for the buildings to fall....about 10 seconds.
Yet you think all the bodies should be intact???
Oh sure... and alive, too, eh? There's a lot of ground between intact and no trace.
Gravity powered rubble is the only force you've got to explain how 1,000 bodies were vaporized in a few seconds. DBB keeps trying to bring in post collapse fires as the reason, but that's a real stretch, imho.
DBB Quote:
I don't know DBB... These are the same connections that the NIST rely on to pull in the "robust" perimeter columns to inititiate collapse.
QUOTE
But the only part that really matters is the weakest link in the design of the structure: the connections of the trusses to the core and to the exterior wall. Once these failed, further collapse was ensured.
I don't know DBB... These are the same connections that the NIST rely on to pull in the "robust" perimeter columns to inititiate collapse.
forthetrees --- Both Grumpy and I understand that the fires were hot enough to form about two dozen instances of red-hot steel. While a minor factor, Ground Zero was unstable and further, local collapses of cavities occurred.
These hot fires cannot be ignored. The remains burnt, not 'vaporized'. Geez.
These hot fires cannot be ignored. The remains burnt, not 'vaporized'. Geez.
QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 15 2007, 01:02 AM)
I don't know DBB... These are the same connections that the NIST rely on to pull in the "robust" perimeter columns to inititiate[sic] collapse.
But I do. But shagster and I have recently posted on this matter. Once again:
The truss seats were about 2.2 times as strong in the horizontal direction as in the vertical direction. The pull-in was horizontal, about 5 kips. The connections required about 100+ kips to destroy horizontally.
shagster worked out, and I agree, that a mere 0.01 GJ of energy was consumed in destroying the truss seats vertically. This, out of an calculated consumed energy of 0.5+ GJ per story is less than 1/50th of the energy budget.
Got it?
But I do. But shagster and I have recently posted on this matter. Once again:
The truss seats were about 2.2 times as strong in the horizontal direction as in the vertical direction. The pull-in was horizontal, about 5 kips. The connections required about 100+ kips to destroy horizontally.
shagster worked out, and I agree, that a mere 0.01 GJ of energy was consumed in destroying the truss seats vertically. This, out of an calculated consumed energy of 0.5+ GJ per story is less than 1/50th of the energy budget.
Got it?
forthetrees
Says who??? Were you there??? When was the area with those remains in them uncovered??? Was that area subject to the 1000C heat for 2200 crematory cycles??? How are human remains supposed to resist those temperatures??? How would it be possible to differentiate between ashes of human remains and ashes of a wooden desk(outside of a lab, in the rubble)???
Says who??? Were you there??? When was the area with those remains in them uncovered??? Was that area subject to the 1000C heat for 2200 crematory cycles??? How are human remains supposed to resist those temperatures??? How would it be possible to differentiate between ashes of human remains and ashes of a wooden desk(outside of a lab, in the rubble)???
Gravity powered rubble is the only force you've got to explain how 1,000 bodies were vaporized in a few seconds.
No it isn't, there is also high temperatures and fires applied over a 6 month period. I don't claim those remains were vaporized, you do. And you have provided not one bit of evidence to show why we should believe that non-sense.
OH COME ON!!! NOBODY CAN BE THAT STUPID AND REMEMBER TO BREATH LONG ENOUGH TO GROW UP!!!
Okay, you explain how anything of a human body can survive(and be visually identifiable)after 2200 crematory cycles at 1000 degrees C.
Grumpy
No, I don't.
The Chief Medical Examiner for the City of New York, does.
We need to save documents like this so the “molten steel deniers” don’t rewrite history.
From GeoNews:
QUOTE
Yes, but the creation of the remains took only the time it took for the buildings to fall....about 10 seconds.
Says who??? Were you there??? When was the area with those remains in them uncovered??? Was that area subject to the 1000C heat for 2200 crematory cycles??? How are human remains supposed to resist those temperatures??? How would it be possible to differentiate between ashes of human remains and ashes of a wooden desk(outside of a lab, in the rubble)???
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Yes, but the creation of the remains took only the time it took for the buildings to fall....about 10 seconds. |
Says who??? Were you there??? When was the area with those remains in them uncovered??? Was that area subject to the 1000C heat for 2200 crematory cycles??? How are human remains supposed to resist those temperatures??? How would it be possible to differentiate between ashes of human remains and ashes of a wooden desk(outside of a lab, in the rubble)???
Gravity powered rubble is the only force you've got to explain how 1,000 bodies were vaporized in a few seconds.
No it isn't, there is also high temperatures and fires applied over a 6 month period. I don't claim those remains were vaporized, you do. And you have provided not one bit of evidence to show why we should believe that non-sense.
QUOTE
DBB keeps trying to bring in post collapse fires as the reason, but that's a real stretch, imho.
OH COME ON!!! NOBODY CAN BE THAT STUPID AND REMEMBER TO BREATH LONG ENOUGH TO GROW UP!!!
Okay, you explain how anything of a human body can survive(and be visually identifiable)after 2200 crematory cycles at 1000 degrees C.
Grumpy
QUOTE (Grumpy+Feb 14 2007, 05:27 PM)
OH COME ON!!! NOBODY CAN BE THAT STUPID AND REMEMBER TO BREATH LONG ENOUGH TO GROW UP!!!
Grumpy
Ms. Grumpster is totally losing it!
"Remember to breath? "
I found out were Grumpster gets his reasoning skills:
http://www.rawstory.com//news/2007/Bush_sa...ns_to_0214.html
Sounds just like the Grumpster doesn't it ( The government must teach classes on this)?
Grumpy
Ms. Grumpster is totally losing it!
"Remember to breath? "
I found out were Grumpster gets his reasoning skills:
QUOTE
Bush said. "I do not know whether or not the Quds Force was ordered from the top echelons of government."
"But here's my point: either they knew or didn't know, and what matters is is that they're there. What's worse -- that the government knew or that the government didn't know?" he added.
"But here's my point: either they knew or didn't know, and what matters is is that they're there. What's worse -- that the government knew or that the government didn't know?" he added.
http://www.rawstory.com//news/2007/Bush_sa...ns_to_0214.html
Sounds just like the Grumpster doesn't it ( The government must teach classes on this)?
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 01:18 AM)
But I do. But shagster and I have recently posted on this matter. Once again:
The truss seats were about 2.2 times as strong in the horizontal direction as in the vertical direction. The pull-in was horizontal, about 5 kips. The connections required about 100+ kips to destroy horizontally.
shagster worked out, and I agree, that a mere 0.01 GJ of energy was consumed in destroying the truss seats vertically. This, out of an calculated consumed energy of 0.5+ GJ per story is less than 1/50th of the energy budget.
Got it?
No. If the upper floor is landing on the lower floor, it is still 'pulling' the connection.
The truss seats were about 2.2 times as strong in the horizontal direction as in the vertical direction. The pull-in was horizontal, about 5 kips. The connections required about 100+ kips to destroy horizontally.
shagster worked out, and I agree, that a mere 0.01 GJ of energy was consumed in destroying the truss seats vertically. This, out of an calculated consumed energy of 0.5+ GJ per story is less than 1/50th of the energy budget.
Got it?
No. If the upper floor is landing on the lower floor, it is still 'pulling' the connection.
QUOTE (Chainsaw+,Feb 14 2007, 06:02 AM)
Since when does debris equal metal?
I don't see anybody denying that debris at ground zero could have been red hot, molten, or running.
Different materials could have been in any one of these states, but not necessarily all three at once.
Debris pile temperature estimates of 2000 F degrees would allow glass to be in a red hot molten state.
Metals such as aluminum and lead would be molten at 2000 F, but not likely red, unless they were mixed with other materials.
And what's with the image? is it suppose to show evidence of some kind?
I have a question, how do you get steel or iron to run at red hot temperatures they have to be yellow-white hot before they will flow well at over 1500c?
That is the problem the materials themselves seen in the photographs are not hot enough to be flowing steel-Iron.
It would appear then that the materials in not steel but Aluminum or Lead, even glass can glow red hot and if it has contaminates in it, you can not tell it from molten metals. Without sampling!
[
Glass?
The OCT is really getting desperate!
I provided a picture so even you might understand.
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/images/...mg_debris_6.jpg
See the metallic Debris all over the room?
Obviously they could answer many of the molten metal question because they were monitoring temperatures. Is it in any of the reports?
NO, of course not.
I don't see anybody denying that debris at ground zero could have been red hot, molten, or running.
Different materials could have been in any one of these states, but not necessarily all three at once.
Debris pile temperature estimates of 2000 F degrees would allow glass to be in a red hot molten state.
Metals such as aluminum and lead would be molten at 2000 F, but not likely red, unless they were mixed with other materials.
And what's with the image? is it suppose to show evidence of some kind?
I have a question, how do you get steel or iron to run at red hot temperatures they have to be yellow-white hot before they will flow well at over 1500c?
That is the problem the materials themselves seen in the photographs are not hot enough to be flowing steel-Iron.
It would appear then that the materials in not steel but Aluminum or Lead, even glass can glow red hot and if it has contaminates in it, you can not tell it from molten metals. Without sampling!
[
Glass?
The OCT is really getting desperate!
I provided a picture so even you might understand.
http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/images/...mg_debris_6.jpg
See the metallic Debris all over the room?
Obviously they could answer many of the molten metal question because they were monitoring temperatures. Is it in any of the reports?
NO, of course not.
reasonwhy
Yeah, none of it is molten.
Grumpy
QUOTE
See the metallic Debris all over the room?
Yeah, none of it is molten.
Grumpy
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 15 2007, 01:03 AM)
The Steve Spak Video everyone should see!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdt7wRQtaY
That is odd..... In the video he says there was no firefighting. Then who was Silverstein 'pulling'?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdt7wRQtaY
That is odd..... In the video he says there was no firefighting. Then who was Silverstein 'pulling'?
QUOTE
I don't claim those remains were vaporized, you do.
No, I don't.
The Chief Medical Examiner for the City of New York, does.
forthetrees
He does not, however, claim that it happened in seconds. Undoubtably he also understood the effects of six months of 1000 C temps on the human body or on the remains when he made his statement. It is not the nomenclature of "evaporation" or "disintegration" that is stupid(though the good doctor could have spoken more accurately), no the stupidity enters the scene when you claim that the bodies disappeared in 10 seconds, that is not possible in those circumstances, nor is that the claim of the good doctor. Only you are claiming such nonsense.
Grumpy
QUOTE
No, I don't.
The Chief Medical Examiner for the City of New York, does.
The Chief Medical Examiner for the City of New York, does.
He does not, however, claim that it happened in seconds. Undoubtably he also understood the effects of six months of 1000 C temps on the human body or on the remains when he made his statement. It is not the nomenclature of "evaporation" or "disintegration" that is stupid(though the good doctor could have spoken more accurately), no the stupidity enters the scene when you claim that the bodies disappeared in 10 seconds, that is not possible in those circumstances, nor is that the claim of the good doctor. Only you are claiming such nonsense.
Grumpy
Indeed, what happened to the bodies?
What happened to the floor assemblies, including the steel floor pans? How can this imagined gravity collapse disappear the floor pans? If they didn't disappear, then what happened to them? Evidence please.
And what on earth happened to all the steel beams? Specifically, what happened to the north wall of WTC1? We have pictures from 9/11, after the twin tower events and before the WTC7 event, which show that there were no huge piles of rubble in Vesey street, between WTC6 and WTC7. Vehicles were driving along there. The NOAA photo from Sept 23 shows almost no perimeter sections from this wall. We can see down into the hollowed out WTC6, and there's a few in there. By my reckoning, we're missing around 600 of the 3 x 3 sections.
Also, NEU-FONZE, Frank, I'm writing an article about you called "Frank Greening and the Missing Dollar". It's about good math based on faulty assumptions, and journalistic responsibility requires that I give you an opportunity to review it and comment before it is published. Please contact me.
ace@acebaker.com
What happened to the floor assemblies, including the steel floor pans? How can this imagined gravity collapse disappear the floor pans? If they didn't disappear, then what happened to them? Evidence please.
And what on earth happened to all the steel beams? Specifically, what happened to the north wall of WTC1? We have pictures from 9/11, after the twin tower events and before the WTC7 event, which show that there were no huge piles of rubble in Vesey street, between WTC6 and WTC7. Vehicles were driving along there. The NOAA photo from Sept 23 shows almost no perimeter sections from this wall. We can see down into the hollowed out WTC6, and there's a few in there. By my reckoning, we're missing around 600 of the 3 x 3 sections.
Also, NEU-FONZE, Frank, I'm writing an article about you called "Frank Greening and the Missing Dollar". It's about good math based on faulty assumptions, and journalistic responsibility requires that I give you an opportunity to review it and comment before it is published. Please contact me.
ace@acebaker.com
From the first of many pages citing the Chief Medical Examiner:
Firehouse.Com News - 12/4/01 - WTC Victims May Have Been 'Vaporized'But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ... no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification. ...
www.firehouse.com/news/2001/12/4_APmissing.html - 28k - Feb 13, 2007 - Cached - Similar pages
Some World Trade Center victims werethe dead were "vaporized," as the medical examiner put it, and may never be ... But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ...
www.fdiai.org/some_world_trade_center_victims_.htm - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
'Monumental' effort to identify N.Y. dead Chicago Sun-Times - Find ...Many of the victims were "vaporized" and their remains might never be found, ... A delegation of victims' families questioned Chief Medical Examiner Charles ...
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011211/ai_n13933250 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages
Probing the DNA of DeathNo one knows how many people vaporized in the fiery crashes and collapsing towers. ... The city's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, led by Dr. Charles ...
www.jonhoyle.com/GeneCodes/LATimes.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
Logo DNA analysis on 911 John Doe II, Fri Nov 04 2005, 09:12PM ...In conjunction with New York City's chief medical examiner, the panel has ... "Likely, they were vaporized along with many of the innocent victims." ...
team8plus.org/print.php?plugin:forum.1639 - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Augusta Chronicle - Comfort, sadness as remains are still ...Others were essentially vaporized in the collapse, and likely won't be found. ... Shaler and Chief Medical Examiner Charles Hirsch hope that an adapted ...
chronicle.augusta.com/stories/091103/nat_124-2216.shtml - 49k - Cached - Similar pages
-------------------------
But this is beside the point....which is my basic questions about the physics of the forces which "vaporized" a thousand or so bodies.
Firehouse.Com News - 12/4/01 - WTC Victims May Have Been 'Vaporized'But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ... no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification. ...
www.firehouse.com/news/2001/12/4_APmissing.html - 28k - Feb 13, 2007 - Cached - Similar pages
Some World Trade Center victims werethe dead were "vaporized," as the medical examiner put it, and may never be ... But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ...
www.fdiai.org/some_world_trade_center_victims_.htm - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
'Monumental' effort to identify N.Y. dead Chicago Sun-Times - Find ...Many of the victims were "vaporized" and their remains might never be found, ... A delegation of victims' families questioned Chief Medical Examiner Charles ...
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011211/ai_n13933250 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages
Probing the DNA of DeathNo one knows how many people vaporized in the fiery crashes and collapsing towers. ... The city's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, led by Dr. Charles ...
www.jonhoyle.com/GeneCodes/LATimes.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
Logo DNA analysis on 911 John Doe II, Fri Nov 04 2005, 09:12PM ...In conjunction with New York City's chief medical examiner, the panel has ... "Likely, they were vaporized along with many of the innocent victims." ...
team8plus.org/print.php?plugin:forum.1639 - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Augusta Chronicle - Comfort, sadness as remains are still ...Others were essentially vaporized in the collapse, and likely won't be found. ... Shaler and Chief Medical Examiner Charles Hirsch hope that an adapted ...
chronicle.augusta.com/stories/091103/nat_124-2216.shtml - 49k - Cached - Similar pages
-------------------------
But this is beside the point....which is my basic questions about the physics of the forces which "vaporized" a thousand or so bodies.
Please look at this Zafar pic.
WTC1 during the event. Picture is taken looking east. Notice how much of the material is falling down and to the left, that is to the north. The wind was blowing towards the southeast that day, at about 5 mph. I can't think of any reason why there would be low pressure to the north of the tower. Why would this material go that way?
WTC1 during the event. Picture is taken looking east. Notice how much of the material is falling down and to the left, that is to the north. The wind was blowing towards the southeast that day, at about 5 mph. I can't think of any reason why there would be low pressure to the north of the tower. Why would this material go that way?
QUOTE (Grumpy+Feb 14 2007, 06:45 PM)
reasonwhy
Yeah, none of it is molten.
Grumpy
We need to save documents like this so the “molten steel deniers” don’t rewrite history.
Molten Metal Migration Map
a LIDAR map of molten metal migration at ground zero
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/geonews-01.jpg
Thermal imagery of the progression of molten steel hot spots from September 18 to September 26
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/geonews-02.gif
The shills have not erased this from Internet memory yet. It's still in the wayback machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031203160307/...october2001.pdf
Yeah, none of it is molten.
Grumpy
We need to save documents like this so the “molten steel deniers” don’t rewrite history.
Molten Metal Migration Map
a LIDAR map of molten metal migration at ground zero
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/geonews-01.jpg
Thermal imagery of the progression of molten steel hot spots from September 18 to September 26
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/geonews-02.gif
The shills have not erased this from Internet memory yet. It's still in the wayback machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031203160307/...october2001.pdf
More quotes for the "molten steel deniers" to make shitt up and try to explain away (Glass, ice, water, you name it ,nothing is to ridiculous for a "molten steel denier" )
Molten Steel Quotes
1
- Recovery worker reflects on months spent at Ground Zero
Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service
May 29, 2002
[...] When [Joe] O'Toole signed on for trade center duty in January, he thought it would be a 30-day assignment. But after one month, he volunteered for another. And another. And another. And another.
[...] Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. "It was dripping from the molten steel," he said.
cache
2
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
Ground Zero was a disaster site like no other---with hazards everywhere. Shards of steel lay upon shards of steel, shifting and unstable, uncovering red hot metal beams excavated from deep beneath layers of sub-floors, exposing further dark crevasses.
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
3
Ironworkers' Job of Clearing Ground Zero Is Over, but the Trauma Lingers
By COREY KILGANNON
November 11, 2002
[...] The four men sat on a sunny sidewalk in Greenwich Village on a recent workday and ate their lunch staring at the steel skeleton of a building going up on West Third Street.
One of them commented on how much easier it was to eat a sandwich in front of steel that was strong and straight and new, not molten and mangled and laden with debris.
NYT
4
Reflections in the Wake of September 11:
Visit to Ground Zero, New York City
by Father Edward A. Malloy, CSC
[...] Eddie and I walked down into the depths of the South Tower, Building Two, which was the first to collapse. Large front end loaders were engaged in their task. Gigantic cranes were lifting pieces of steel weighing tons, some of which were being placed on the back of semi trucks. Firefighters atop a number of ladder trucks were spraying in the areas of greatest smoke. The average temperature beneath the rubble is said to be 1500 F. so that when steel is brought up it is molten and takes two or three days to cool down.
http://www.nd.edu/~ndmag/reflect/malloydiary.html
5
RICH GARLOCK: Going below, it was smoky and really hot. We had rescue teams with meters for oxygen and carbon dioxide. They also had temperature monitors. Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running.
PBS, September 2002
6
TWO WEEKS AT GROUND ZERO
By Guy Lounsbury
[...] My particular part was to help maintain security in and around the perimeter of the site.
[...] Two weeks after the attack, one fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains.
home.nycap.rr.com
7
At Ground Zero
NIH'ers Respond to Tragedy in NYC
By Rich McManus
Photos by Van Hubbard, Susan Orsega, Rich McManus
[...] Ed Pfister's Diary:
[...] I spent several hours tonight, walking "the pile" and attempting to soak it all in for the last time and find a bit of closure...deep below ground a portion of the pile was still on fire and boiled with molten material. Sometimes, open flame would erupt as a crane pulled debris out and air rushed in. Fire hoses constantly poured streams of water causing huge billowing steam clouds to rise up over the site into the huge lights above.
http://www.nih.gov/news/NIH-Record/10_30_2001/story01.htm
8
Reluctant hero narrates horror of N.Y. mission
September 11, 2002
[...] Interim Bryan Fire Department Chief Mike Donoho was one of those sent to "ground zero," as the World Trade Center site quickly became known. [...] Here is Donoho's story, as told to Eagle staff writer John LeBas:
[...] What you had were large columns of steel that were just stuck into massive amounts of molten steel and other metals, that had just fused together from the heat and bonded together from the strength of the collapse.
We dug and we dug and we dug, and we cut and we cut and we cut, and we did not see anything that resembled any type of furniture, any type of personal belongings. We found some pieces of things like a telephone, things like that. I think we found credit cards a few times, and we found a couple of stuffed animals. But you would expect to see, like, a bunch of desks, a bunch of chairs. The only way I can explain it is, if you take a car and put it in one of those machines where they crush it and make it look like a cube, and you can't recognize what it is, that's what the whole area looked like. It looked like a massive, molten mess that had been fused together, like a car that had been cubed and crushed.
With all that heavy, heavy stuff, there were wires, rebar, concrete. Most of it was just steel. A lot of what we were walking on was just molten steel.
http://www.theeagle.com/septanniv/091102firefighter.htm
Molten Steel Quotes
1
- Recovery worker reflects on months spent at Ground Zero
Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service
May 29, 2002
[...] When [Joe] O'Toole signed on for trade center duty in January, he thought it would be a 30-day assignment. But after one month, he volunteered for another. And another. And another. And another.
[...] Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. "It was dripping from the molten steel," he said.
cache
2
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
Ground Zero was a disaster site like no other---with hazards everywhere. Shards of steel lay upon shards of steel, shifting and unstable, uncovering red hot metal beams excavated from deep beneath layers of sub-floors, exposing further dark crevasses.
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
3
Ironworkers' Job of Clearing Ground Zero Is Over, but the Trauma Lingers
By COREY KILGANNON
November 11, 2002
[...] The four men sat on a sunny sidewalk in Greenwich Village on a recent workday and ate their lunch staring at the steel skeleton of a building going up on West Third Street.
One of them commented on how much easier it was to eat a sandwich in front of steel that was strong and straight and new, not molten and mangled and laden with debris.
NYT
4
Reflections in the Wake of September 11:
Visit to Ground Zero, New York City
by Father Edward A. Malloy, CSC
[...] Eddie and I walked down into the depths of the South Tower, Building Two, which was the first to collapse. Large front end loaders were engaged in their task. Gigantic cranes were lifting pieces of steel weighing tons, some of which were being placed on the back of semi trucks. Firefighters atop a number of ladder trucks were spraying in the areas of greatest smoke. The average temperature beneath the rubble is said to be 1500 F. so that when steel is brought up it is molten and takes two or three days to cool down.
http://www.nd.edu/~ndmag/reflect/malloydiary.html
5
RICH GARLOCK: Going below, it was smoky and really hot. We had rescue teams with meters for oxygen and carbon dioxide. They also had temperature monitors. Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running.
PBS, September 2002
6
TWO WEEKS AT GROUND ZERO
By Guy Lounsbury
[...] My particular part was to help maintain security in and around the perimeter of the site.
[...] Two weeks after the attack, one fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains.
home.nycap.rr.com
7
At Ground Zero
NIH'ers Respond to Tragedy in NYC
By Rich McManus
Photos by Van Hubbard, Susan Orsega, Rich McManus
[...] Ed Pfister's Diary:
[...] I spent several hours tonight, walking "the pile" and attempting to soak it all in for the last time and find a bit of closure...deep below ground a portion of the pile was still on fire and boiled with molten material. Sometimes, open flame would erupt as a crane pulled debris out and air rushed in. Fire hoses constantly poured streams of water causing huge billowing steam clouds to rise up over the site into the huge lights above.
http://www.nih.gov/news/NIH-Record/10_30_2001/story01.htm
8
Reluctant hero narrates horror of N.Y. mission
September 11, 2002
[...] Interim Bryan Fire Department Chief Mike Donoho was one of those sent to "ground zero," as the World Trade Center site quickly became known. [...] Here is Donoho's story, as told to Eagle staff writer John LeBas:
[...] What you had were large columns of steel that were just stuck into massive amounts of molten steel and other metals, that had just fused together from the heat and bonded together from the strength of the collapse.
We dug and we dug and we dug, and we cut and we cut and we cut, and we did not see anything that resembled any type of furniture, any type of personal belongings. We found some pieces of things like a telephone, things like that. I think we found credit cards a few times, and we found a couple of stuffed animals. But you would expect to see, like, a bunch of desks, a bunch of chairs. The only way I can explain it is, if you take a car and put it in one of those machines where they crush it and make it look like a cube, and you can't recognize what it is, that's what the whole area looked like. It looked like a massive, molten mess that had been fused together, like a car that had been cubed and crushed.
With all that heavy, heavy stuff, there were wires, rebar, concrete. Most of it was just steel. A lot of what we were walking on was just molten steel.
http://www.theeagle.com/septanniv/091102firefighter.htm
QUOTE (Common Sense+Feb 14 2007, 05:03 PM)
The Steve Spak Video everyone should see!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdt7wRQtaY
This video is hilarious.
12 window have flames showing and Spak claims that proves the entire building was on fire.
Then he proves how little damage was from the towers.
Is it supposed to be a spoof on 9/11 truth videos?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdt7wRQtaY
This video is hilarious.
12 window have flames showing and Spak claims that proves the entire building was on fire.
Then he proves how little damage was from the towers.
Is it supposed to be a spoof on 9/11 truth videos?
Lozenge,
I also think Gordon's math is crappy and partly incorrect but the whole idea and (iii) reply of Greening is
in fact the most important part and the part where it is all about.
Btw in the beginning I always thought that wtc1's tilt was ignorable and once
made a page to estimate the E1 from it (2.2GJ), I forgot the tilt and removed
the site and never had the time/mood/energy/spirit to start again... :-)
I also think Gordon's math is crappy and partly incorrect but the whole idea and (iii) reply of Greening is
in fact the most important part and the part where it is all about.
Btw in the beginning I always thought that wtc1's tilt was ignorable and once
made a page to estimate the E1 from it (2.2GJ), I forgot the tilt and removed
the site and never had the time/mood/energy/spirit to start again... :-)
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 15 2007, 06:06 AM)
We need to save documents like this so the “molten steel deniers” don’t rewrite history.
From GeoNews:
QUOTE
Thermal Imagery of the progression
of molten steel hotspots
from September 18 to September
25.
This statement is not presented as fact, but only an estimate by an unknown source.of molten steel hotspots
from September 18 to September
25.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Thermal Imagery of the progression of molten steel hotspots from September 18 to September 25. |
This statement is not presented as fact, but only an estimate by an unknown source.
This is known as emissive data, or heat being given off from the structure
from underlying hot debris or molten steel.
This is known as emissive data, or heat being given off from the structure
from underlying hot debris or molten steel.
This comment is more realistic, but still is only a guess.
Here is a report from a year later, on the Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer data used in the GeoNews article.
With these AVIRIS data set and new algorithm, 8 hot spot zones were identified in the September 16t h data with temperatures ranging from 700 to 1019 - K and fractional areas from 1.1 to 18-%. Analysis of the data set acquired on September 18t h showed 7 of the hot spot zones still present with temperatures ranging from 471 to 952-K and fractional areas from 0.5 to 36-%. These imaging spectrometer derived physical parameters of fire temperature and fractional-area were found useful to the personnel making decisions on the ground. As you can see, the highest temperature estimate is 1019 C.
Steel melts at 1370 C, so the thermal imaging doesn't support the claims of molten steel in the debris pile.
Glass, which was present in the pile in the forms of window glass and rock wool, melt at 1000 C, and could have coalesced into molten pools.
Here is a report from a year later, on the Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer data used in the GeoNews article.
QUOTE
With these AVIRIS data set and new algorithm, 8 hot spot zones were identified in the September 16t h data with temperatures ranging from 700 to 1019 - K and fractional areas from 1.1 to 18-%. Analysis of the data set acquired on September 18t h showed 7 of the hot spot zones still present with temperatures ranging from 471 to 952-K and fractional areas from 0.5 to 36-%. These imaging spectrometer derived physical parameters of fire temperature and fractional-area were found useful to the personnel making decisions on the ground.
Steel melts at 1370 C, so the thermal imaging doesn't support the claims of molten steel in the debris pile.
Glass, which was present in the pile in the forms of window glass and rock wool, melt at 1000 C, and could have coalesced into molten pools.
QUOTE (einsteen+Feb 15 2007, 10:43 AM)
Lozenge,
I also think Gordon's math is crappy and partly incorrect but the whole idea and (iii) reply of Greening is
in fact the most important part and the part where it is all about.
There were elastic waves traveling through the tower but it's a matter of their magnitude. There's also the issue of the ability of the floor connections to transfer elastic strain in columns to the floor sections where most of the mass was in the upper regions of the towers. The connections were weak compared with the columns. They would need to withstand fast displacements in order to convey a large amount of momentum and energy away from the front. The connections failed when an impacted floor section tried to convey a dynamic force through the connections, as evident in the collapse videos and rubble. The situation would be similar for axial strain in columns where a large dynamic force on the connections would result from the reaction force of the floor sections which had a large mass and inertia.
A model such as Gordon's tacitly assumes that the connections wouldn't fail. It relies heavily on the Bazant model, which is known to be a very idealized model, in order to generate a scenario of significant elastic strains in the columns (perfect axial strikes, 3% bulk column deformation, no elastic buckling, no splice or connection failure). It doesn't consider other failure modes.
I also think Gordon's math is crappy and partly incorrect but the whole idea and (iii) reply of Greening is
in fact the most important part and the part where it is all about.
There were elastic waves traveling through the tower but it's a matter of their magnitude. There's also the issue of the ability of the floor connections to transfer elastic strain in columns to the floor sections where most of the mass was in the upper regions of the towers. The connections were weak compared with the columns. They would need to withstand fast displacements in order to convey a large amount of momentum and energy away from the front. The connections failed when an impacted floor section tried to convey a dynamic force through the connections, as evident in the collapse videos and rubble. The situation would be similar for axial strain in columns where a large dynamic force on the connections would result from the reaction force of the floor sections which had a large mass and inertia.
A model such as Gordon's tacitly assumes that the connections wouldn't fail. It relies heavily on the Bazant model, which is known to be a very idealized model, in order to generate a scenario of significant elastic strains in the columns (perfect axial strikes, 3% bulk column deformation, no elastic buckling, no splice or connection failure). It doesn't consider other failure modes.
About the identification of bodies at Ground Zero:
It appears that about 20,000 samples classified as "human remains" were recovered and sent for DNA analysis. About 1500 victims were identified from these samples. But this does NOT mean that the remaining 1400 or so victims were "vaporized". It means only that the positive identification of 1400 victims was not achieved. In some cases victims that were close together at the time of the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 were "merged" so that the recovered remains were composed of more than one victim, thereby creating an unusable DNA signature.
DNA identification of a victim required that reference DNA material is available for comparison with the recovered sample. Many relatives of presumed victims submitted items like clothing , personal effects - even tooth brushes - as sources of DNA reference material. However, many victims were simply visiting the WTC on the morning of 9/11 and no one submitted reference samples for these people, hence no DNA identifications were possible in such cases. The WTC collapse was not like your typical airplane crash where there is a "passenger list" to work with.
I would ask those who think that 1000 victims were "vaporized", how do you think the final death toll from the WTC collapse was arrived at?
NF
It appears that about 20,000 samples classified as "human remains" were recovered and sent for DNA analysis. About 1500 victims were identified from these samples. But this does NOT mean that the remaining 1400 or so victims were "vaporized". It means only that the positive identification of 1400 victims was not achieved. In some cases victims that were close together at the time of the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 were "merged" so that the recovered remains were composed of more than one victim, thereby creating an unusable DNA signature.
DNA identification of a victim required that reference DNA material is available for comparison with the recovered sample. Many relatives of presumed victims submitted items like clothing , personal effects - even tooth brushes - as sources of DNA reference material. However, many victims were simply visiting the WTC on the morning of 9/11 and no one submitted reference samples for these people, hence no DNA identifications were possible in such cases. The WTC collapse was not like your typical airplane crash where there is a "passenger list" to work with.
I would ask those who think that 1000 victims were "vaporized", how do you think the final death toll from the WTC collapse was arrived at?
NF
QUOTE (einsteen+Feb 15 2007, 10:43 AM)
Lozenge,
I also think Gordon's math is crappy and partly incorrect but the whole idea and (iii) reply of Greening is
in fact the most important part and the part where it is all about.
Btw in the beginning I always thought that wtc1's tilt was ignorable and once
made a page to estimate the E1 from it (2.2GJ), I forgot the tilt and removed
the site and never had the time/mood/energy/spirit to start again... :-)
I think this is the section you are referring to:
My take on this is that it is a bit of a straw man argument, because it only applies to the "first impacted floor" at the beginning of the collapse. Greening doesn't propose any mechanism for the creation of "Lateral and even torsional compression waves" for any of the floors below this 1st impacted floor.
I also think Gordon's math is crappy and partly incorrect but the whole idea and (iii) reply of Greening is
in fact the most important part and the part where it is all about.
Btw in the beginning I always thought that wtc1's tilt was ignorable and once
made a page to estimate the E1 from it (2.2GJ), I forgot the tilt and removed
the site and never had the time/mood/energy/spirit to start again... :-)
I think this is the section you are referring to:
QUOTE
WTC 1's collapse also involved a tilting of the upper section of the Tower and was therefore asymmetric. Thus the downward collapsing force had a significant angular component. Why is this important? Because the longitudinal compression wave induced by the initial rotational (tilting) action and free fall collapse of the upper sections of WTC 1 & 2 was not propagated down the central vertical axis of the columns. Lateral and even torsional compression waves were created. This means that most of the initial impact kinetic energy was expended in destroying the first impacted floor as proposed in Greening’s Energy Transfer in the WTC Collapse report. In addition it is well known that an elastic compression wave in a spliced column system such as the WTC will not propagate efficiently, but dissipate, at each splice. Thus there is no justification for the assumption that the initial elastic deflection would propagate 24 storeys below the impact floor. This is an idealized concept that was not satisfied in the collapse of the Twin Towers.
My take on this is that it is a bit of a straw man argument, because it only applies to the "first impacted floor" at the beginning of the collapse. Greening doesn't propose any mechanism for the creation of "Lateral and even torsional compression waves" for any of the floors below this 1st impacted floor.
reasonwhy
Oh, my, more hearsay and amateur data from reasonless. All of it has been thouroughly debunked many times, it's still just as worthless as it was then.
AceBaker
Funny you should post that photo. In trying to make one point you show the debris headed toward WTC 7, which at other times you claim was not damaged. It's called "shooting yourself in the foot".
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc65_small.JPG
WTC 7 is the grey building the debris of the north side of tower 1 is about to smite.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/image...oto-cropped.jpg
Here are your supposedly missing frame members, they are strewn everywhere on top of and in WTC 6. Since there are probably several layers of them and since some are covered by debris from WTC 6's continued collapse you can not get a complete count(or not a believable one) so stop with your stupid "missing steel" assertions already, it's making you look stupid(and dishonest).
Grumpy
Oh, my, more hearsay and amateur data from reasonless. All of it has been thouroughly debunked many times, it's still just as worthless as it was then.
AceBaker
Funny you should post that photo. In trying to make one point you show the debris headed toward WTC 7, which at other times you claim was not damaged. It's called "shooting yourself in the foot".
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc65_small.JPG
WTC 7 is the grey building the debris of the north side of tower 1 is about to smite.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/image...oto-cropped.jpg
Here are your supposedly missing frame members, they are strewn everywhere on top of and in WTC 6. Since there are probably several layers of them and since some are covered by debris from WTC 6's continued collapse you can not get a complete count(or not a believable one) so stop with your stupid "missing steel" assertions already, it's making you look stupid(and dishonest).
Grumpy
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 15 2007, 02:46 PM)
My take on this is that it is a bit of a straw man argument, because it only applies to the "first impacted floor" at the beginning of the collapse. Greening doesn't propose any mechanism for the creation of "Lateral and even torsional compression waves" for any of the floors below this 1st impacted floor.
That was what I also thought but didn't say, you exactly said what I was thinking. In the past there was also a wedge discussion here, i.e. an effect pressing out the perimeter columns (I have to say that I still have no picture of the official collapse, an animation or emulation would be so nice but for NIST the initiation is what matters) but that is also a related problem, after a few collected floors the angles are effectively zero.
That was what I also thought but didn't say, you exactly said what I was thinking. In the past there was also a wedge discussion here, i.e. an effect pressing out the perimeter columns (I have to say that I still have no picture of the official collapse, an animation or emulation would be so nice but for NIST the initiation is what matters) but that is also a related problem, after a few collected floors the angles are effectively zero.
forthetrees
Firehouse.Com News - 12/4/01 - WTC Victims May Have Been 'Vaporized'But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ... no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification. ...
www.firehouse.com/news/2001/12/4_APmissing.html - 28k - Feb 13, 2007 - Cached - Similar pages
Some World Trade Center victims werethe dead were "vaporized," as the medical examiner put it, and may never be ... But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ...
www.fdiai.org/some_world_trade_center_victims_.htm - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
'Monumental' effort to identify N.Y. dead Chicago Sun-Times - Find ...Many of the victims were "vaporized" and their remains might never be found, ... A delegation of victims' families questioned Chief Medical Examiner Charles ...
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011211/ai_n13933250 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages
Probing the DNA of DeathNo one knows how many people vaporized in the fiery crashes and collapsing towers. ... The city's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, led by Dr. Charles ...
www.jonhoyle.com/GeneCodes/LATimes.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
Logo DNA analysis on 911 John Doe II, Fri Nov 04 2005, 09:12PM ...In conjunction with New York City's chief medical examiner, the panel has ... "Likely, they were vaporized along with many of the innocent victims." ...
team8plus.org/print.php?plugin:forum.1639 - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Augusta Chronicle - Comfort, sadness as remains are still ...Others were essentially vaporized in the collapse, and likely won't be found. ... Shaler and Chief Medical Examiner Charles Hirsch hope that an adapted ...
chronicle.augusta.com/stories/091103/nat_124-2216.shtml - 49k - Cached - Similar pages
In which one of these or in what other cite does it say the bodies were "vaporized" in 10 seconds??? Vaporized is a poor choice of words but it makes a nice headline in a newspaper. Immolated, Flambeued, roasted, burned, toasted, cremated(repeatedly), burnt up, converted to ashes, combusted, oxidized, gasified...all of these are a more accurate description of why those bodies were not found.
In which one of these or in what other cite does it say the bodies were "vaporized" in 10 seconds??? Vaporized is a poor choice of words but it makes a nice headline in a newspaper. Immolated, Flambeued, roasted, burned, toasted, cremated(repeatedly), burnt up, converted to ashes, combusted, oxidized, gasified...all of these are a more accurate description of why those bodies were not found.
But this is beside the point....which is my basic questions about the physics of the forces which "vaporized" a thousand or so bodies.
Combustion-Combustion or burning is a complex sequence of chemical reactions between a fuel and an oxidant accompanied by the production of heat or both heat and light in the form of either a glow or flames.
In a complete combustion reaction, a compound reacts with an oxidizing element, and the products are compounds of each element in the fuel with the oxidizing element. For example:
CH_4 + 2O_2 \rightarrow \; CO_2 + 2H_2O + \textrm{heat}
CH_2S + 6F_2 \rightarrow \; CF_4 + 2HF + SF_6 + \textrm{heat}
A simpler example can be seen in the combustion of hydrogen and oxygen, which is a commonly used reaction in rocket engines:
2H_2 + O_2 \rightarrow \; 2H_2O + \textrm{heat}
The result is simply water vapor.
In the large majority of the real world uses of combustion, the oxygen (O2) oxidant is obtained from the ambient air and the resultant flue gas from the combustion will contain nitrogen:
CH_4 + 2O_2 + 7.52N_2 \rightarrow \; CO_2 + 2H_2O + 7.52 N_2 + \textrm{heat}
As can be seen, when air is the source of the oxygen, nitrogen is by far the largest part of the resultant flue gas.
In reality, combustion processes are never perfect or complete. In flue gases from combustion of carbon (as in coal combustion) or carbon compounds (as in combustion of hydrocarbons, wood etc.) both unburned carbon (as soot) and carbon compounds (CO and others) will be present. Also, when air is the oxidant, some nitrogen will be oxidized to various, mostly harmful, nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Wiki
Grumpy
Very carefully with painstaking documentation. Much has been written about the process.
QUOTE
Firehouse.Com News - 12/4/01 - WTC Victims May Have Been 'Vaporized'But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ... no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification. ...
www.firehouse.com/news/2001/12/4_APmissing.html - 28k - Feb 13, 2007 - Cached - Similar pages
Some World Trade Center victims werethe dead were "vaporized," as the medical examiner put it, and may never be ... But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ...
www.fdiai.org/some_world_trade_center_victims_.htm - 30k - Cached - Similar pages
'Monumental' effort to identify N.Y. dead Chicago Sun-Times - Find ...Many of the victims were "vaporized" and their remains might never be found, ... A delegation of victims' families questioned Chief Medical Examiner Charles ...
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011211/ai_n13933250 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages
Probing the DNA of DeathNo one knows how many people vaporized in the fiery crashes and collapsing towers. ... The city's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, led by Dr. Charles ...
www.jonhoyle.com/GeneCodes/LATimes.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
Logo DNA analysis on 911 John Doe II, Fri Nov 04 2005, 09:12PM ...In conjunction with New York City's chief medical examiner, the panel has ... "Likely, they were vaporized along with many of the innocent victims." ...
team8plus.org/print.php?plugin:forum.1639 - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
Augusta Chronicle - Comfort, sadness as remains are still ...Others were essentially vaporized in the collapse, and likely won't be found. ... Shaler and Chief Medical Examiner Charles Hirsch hope that an adapted ...
chronicle.augusta.com/stories/091103/nat_124-2216.shtml - 49k - Cached - Similar pages
In which one of these or in what other cite does it say the bodies were "vaporized" in 10 seconds??? Vaporized is a poor choice of words but it makes a nice headline in a newspaper. Immolated, Flambeued, roasted, burned, toasted, cremated(repeatedly), burnt up, converted to ashes, combusted, oxidized, gasified...all of these are a more accurate description of why those bodies were not found.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
Firehouse.Com News - 12/4/01 - WTC Victims May Have Been 'Vaporized'But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ... no one is sure how many _ had been ``vaporized'' and were beyond identification. ... www.firehouse.com/news/2001/12/4_APmissing.html - 28k - Feb 13, 2007 - Cached - Similar pages Some World Trade Center victims werethe dead were "vaporized," as the medical examiner put it, and may never be ... But Dr. Charles Hirsch, the chief medical examiner, triggered an angry ... www.fdiai.org/some_world_trade_center_victims_.htm - 30k - Cached - Similar pages 'Monumental' effort to identify N.Y. dead Chicago Sun-Times - Find ...Many of the victims were "vaporized" and their remains might never be found, ... A delegation of victims' families questioned Chief Medical Examiner Charles ... www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011211/ai_n13933250 - 33k - Cached - Similar pages Probing the DNA of DeathNo one knows how many people vaporized in the fiery crashes and collapsing towers. ... The city's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, led by Dr. Charles ... www.jonhoyle.com/GeneCodes/LATimes.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages Logo DNA analysis on 911 John Doe II, Fri Nov 04 2005, 09:12PM ...In conjunction with New York City's chief medical examiner, the panel has ... "Likely, they were vaporized along with many of the innocent victims." ... team8plus.org/print.php?plugin:forum.1639 - 32k - Cached - Similar pages Augusta Chronicle - Comfort, sadness as remains are still ...Others were essentially vaporized in the collapse, and likely won't be found. ... Shaler and Chief Medical Examiner Charles Hirsch hope that an adapted ... chronicle.augusta.com/stories/091103/nat_124-2216.shtml - 49k - Cached - Similar pages |
In which one of these or in what other cite does it say the bodies were "vaporized" in 10 seconds??? Vaporized is a poor choice of words but it makes a nice headline in a newspaper. Immolated, Flambeued, roasted, burned, toasted, cremated(repeatedly), burnt up, converted to ashes, combusted, oxidized, gasified...all of these are a more accurate description of why those bodies were not found.
But this is beside the point....which is my basic questions about the physics of the forces which "vaporized" a thousand or so bodies.
Combustion-Combustion or burning is a complex sequence of chemical reactions between a fuel and an oxidant accompanied by the production of heat or both heat and light in the form of either a glow or flames.
In a complete combustion reaction, a compound reacts with an oxidizing element, and the products are compounds of each element in the fuel with the oxidizing element. For example:
CH_4 + 2O_2 \rightarrow \; CO_2 + 2H_2O + \textrm{heat}
CH_2S + 6F_2 \rightarrow \; CF_4 + 2HF + SF_6 + \textrm{heat}
A simpler example can be seen in the combustion of hydrogen and oxygen, which is a commonly used reaction in rocket engines:
2H_2 + O_2 \rightarrow \; 2H_2O + \textrm{heat}
The result is simply water vapor.
In the large majority of the real world uses of combustion, the oxygen (O2) oxidant is obtained from the ambient air and the resultant flue gas from the combustion will contain nitrogen:
CH_4 + 2O_2 + 7.52N_2 \rightarrow \; CO_2 + 2H_2O + 7.52 N_2 + \textrm{heat}
As can be seen, when air is the source of the oxygen, nitrogen is by far the largest part of the resultant flue gas.
In reality, combustion processes are never perfect or complete. In flue gases from combustion of carbon (as in coal combustion) or carbon compounds (as in combustion of hydrocarbons, wood etc.) both unburned carbon (as soot) and carbon compounds (CO and others) will be present. Also, when air is the oxidant, some nitrogen will be oxidized to various, mostly harmful, nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Wiki
Grumpy
QUOTE
I would ask those who think that 1000 victims were "vaporized", how do you think the final death toll from the WTC collapse was arrived at?
Very carefully with painstaking documentation. Much has been written about the process.
QUOTE (Grumpy+Feb 15 2007, 07:20 AM)
reasonwhy
Oh, my, more hearsay and amateur data from reasonless. All of it has been thouroughly debunked many times, it's still just as worthless as it was then.
Grumpy
This is the first time I will agree with you Grumster, I am an amateur. I am not a pro (paid) as the shills on this forum are.
What is amusing is how bad the amateur's are kicking the pros a$$ in the debate.
First had reports are not hearsay.
Just because you and all the other “molten steel deniers” continually repeat your lies (been thoroughly debunked many times), that doesn’t make the lies true.
I posted a report dated from when they still had engineers and temperature monitors at Groud Zero to verify the accuracy (it was used to help with the quick evidence removal and destruction):
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=177904
The only response was from the homo-promoter claiming it was Rockwool (firesafe insulation)!
Rock would really add to the fires!
Oh, my, more hearsay and amateur data from reasonless. All of it has been thouroughly debunked many times, it's still just as worthless as it was then.
Grumpy
This is the first time I will agree with you Grumster, I am an amateur. I am not a pro (paid) as the shills on this forum are.
What is amusing is how bad the amateur's are kicking the pros a$$ in the debate.
First had reports are not hearsay.
Just because you and all the other “molten steel deniers” continually repeat your lies (been thoroughly debunked many times), that doesn’t make the lies true.
I posted a report dated from when they still had engineers and temperature monitors at Groud Zero to verify the accuracy (it was used to help with the quick evidence removal and destruction):
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=177904
The only response was from the homo-promoter claiming it was Rockwool (firesafe insulation)!
Rock would really add to the fires!
QUOTE (Grumpy+Feb 15 2007, 03:20 PM)
reasonwhy
Oh, my, more hearsay and amateur data from reasonless. All of it has been thouroughly debunked many times, it's still just as worthless as it was then.
AceBaker
Funny you should post that photo. In trying to make one point you show the debris headed toward WTC 7, which at other times you claim was not damaged. It's called "shooting yourself in the foot".
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc65_small.JPG
WTC 7 is the grey building the debris of the north side of tower 1 is about to smite.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/image...oto-cropped.jpg
Here are your supposedly missing frame members, they are strewn everywhere on top of and in WTC 6. Since there are probably several layers of them and since some are covered by debris from WTC 6's continued collapse you can not get a complete count(or not a believable one) so stop with your stupid "missing steel" assertions already, it's making you look stupid(and dishonest).
Grumpy
I never said WTC7 had NO damage. The damage to WTC7 was insufficient to cause any sort of global collapse, and even if collapse occured from the damage to the south side of it, such collapse could not be symmetrical, nor could it proceed as radpidly, nor as smoothly as it did.
The reason for posting the Zafar picture is to wonder why the free-falling debris is drifting northward as it falls. I am unable to think of a physical explanation for this. This material appears to be going against the wind.
The NOAA photo is quite clear. There are no piles of perimeter columns inside WTC6, there are a few sections. Same with the roof. There are a few sections. Vesey street has been partially cleared in this September 23 photo, but there was never any big pile of debris in Vesy street. Here are two photos from 9/11, taken after the twin tower events, and before the WTC7 event. Vehicles were driving back and forth on Vesey.
Oh, my, more hearsay and amateur data from reasonless. All of it has been thouroughly debunked many times, it's still just as worthless as it was then.
AceBaker
Funny you should post that photo. In trying to make one point you show the debris headed toward WTC 7, which at other times you claim was not damaged. It's called "shooting yourself in the foot".
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc65_small.JPG
WTC 7 is the grey building the debris of the north side of tower 1 is about to smite.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/image...oto-cropped.jpg
Here are your supposedly missing frame members, they are strewn everywhere on top of and in WTC 6. Since there are probably several layers of them and since some are covered by debris from WTC 6's continued collapse you can not get a complete count(or not a believable one) so stop with your stupid "missing steel" assertions already, it's making you look stupid(and dishonest).
Grumpy
I never said WTC7 had NO damage. The damage to WTC7 was insufficient to cause any sort of global collapse, and even if collapse occured from the damage to the south side of it, such collapse could not be symmetrical, nor could it proceed as radpidly, nor as smoothly as it did.
The reason for posting the Zafar picture is to wonder why the free-falling debris is drifting northward as it falls. I am unable to think of a physical explanation for this. This material appears to be going against the wind.
The NOAA photo is quite clear. There are no piles of perimeter columns inside WTC6, there are a few sections. Same with the roof. There are a few sections. Vesey street has been partially cleared in this September 23 photo, but there was never any big pile of debris in Vesy street. Here are two photos from 9/11, taken after the twin tower events, and before the WTC7 event. Vehicles were driving back and forth on Vesey.
AceBaker
According to the seismic evidence WTC 7 took 24 seconds to disintegrate, yet you focus solely on just the last six seconds. It was not a smooth process, nor a symmetrical one. The evidence indicates the south side collapsed starting a full 18 seconds before the north face moved. You also have no evidence of the severity of the original damage nor of the subsiquent fire damage. That it fell due to the damage caused by the collapse of tower 1 is simply a no brainer(if you don't realize this you have no brains). Get over yourself, you do not know more than the experts that were on the scene.
According to the seismic evidence WTC 7 took 24 seconds to disintegrate, yet you focus solely on just the last six seconds. It was not a smooth process, nor a symmetrical one. The evidence indicates the south side collapsed starting a full 18 seconds before the north face moved. You also have no evidence of the severity of the original damage nor of the subsiquent fire damage. That it fell due to the damage caused by the collapse of tower 1 is simply a no brainer(if you don't realize this you have no brains). Get over yourself, you do not know more than the experts that were on the scene.
The NOAA photo is quite clear. There are no piles of perimeter columns inside WTC6, there are a few sections.
Are you just blind or are you just that stupid. I see them, piles and piles of them, everyone but you seems to see them, all the photos show plenty of frame members all over that building, inside it and they DID reach all the way across to 7. That you show a picture of a parked truck does not indicate the street was not blocked. And the enourmous amounts of smoke and fire seen in 7 was still there even if you and reasonless refuse to acknowledge it. The rubble of almost all the floors was in the basements(they hauled away 1.6 million tons of it, floor trusses, concrete, furniture, human remains and all). The outer frames were layed out like banana peels almost 400 feet in all directions, the core members were mostly on top of the other rubble in or near the footprint. There was no missing debris.
As this photo shows, the fires and smoke was coming out of every floor and there are some rather large pieces of tower 1 sitting in the street.
reasonless
Without testing, sampling or expert witnesses first hand reports are just opinions. Since NOT ONE puddle of steel that had been melted was found anywhere in the WTC complex there could have been no molten steel. Hot steel, glowing steel and glowing steel dripping molten glass(which has been documented), but NO MOLTEN STEEL no matter what some amateur claims.
Your going to have to do more than quote the misconceptions of amateurs to document molten steel. If it existed at all it would be obvious because it would flow to the lowest point and cool into puddles, none of which were found, nor were any removed by some vast gov't conspiracy.
Grumpy
QUOTE
I never said WTC7 had NO damage. The damage to WTC7 was insufficient to cause any sort of global collapse, and even if collapse occured from the damage to the south side of it, such collapse could not be symmetrical, nor could it proceed as radpidly, nor as smoothly as it did.
According to the seismic evidence WTC 7 took 24 seconds to disintegrate, yet you focus solely on just the last six seconds. It was not a smooth process, nor a symmetrical one. The evidence indicates the south side collapsed starting a full 18 seconds before the north face moved. You also have no evidence of the severity of the original damage nor of the subsiquent fire damage. That it fell due to the damage caused by the collapse of tower 1 is simply a no brainer(if you don't realize this you have no brains). Get over yourself, you do not know more than the experts that were on the scene.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| I never said WTC7 had NO damage. The damage to WTC7 was insufficient to cause any sort of global collapse, and even if collapse occured from the damage to the south side of it, such collapse could not be symmetrical, nor could it proceed as radpidly, nor as smoothly as it did. |
According to the seismic evidence WTC 7 took 24 seconds to disintegrate, yet you focus solely on just the last six seconds. It was not a smooth process, nor a symmetrical one. The evidence indicates the south side collapsed starting a full 18 seconds before the north face moved. You also have no evidence of the severity of the original damage nor of the subsiquent fire damage. That it fell due to the damage caused by the collapse of tower 1 is simply a no brainer(if you don't realize this you have no brains). Get over yourself, you do not know more than the experts that were on the scene.
The NOAA photo is quite clear. There are no piles of perimeter columns inside WTC6, there are a few sections.
Are you just blind or are you just that stupid. I see them, piles and piles of them, everyone but you seems to see them, all the photos show plenty of frame members all over that building, inside it and they DID reach all the way across to 7. That you show a picture of a parked truck does not indicate the street was not blocked. And the enourmous amounts of smoke and fire seen in 7 was still there even if you and reasonless refuse to acknowledge it. The rubble of almost all the floors was in the basements(they hauled away 1.6 million tons of it, floor trusses, concrete, furniture, human remains and all). The outer frames were layed out like banana peels almost 400 feet in all directions, the core members were mostly on top of the other rubble in or near the footprint. There was no missing debris.
As this photo shows, the fires and smoke was coming out of every floor and there are some rather large pieces of tower 1 sitting in the street.
reasonless
QUOTE
First had reports are not hearsay.
Without testing, sampling or expert witnesses first hand reports are just opinions. Since NOT ONE puddle of steel that had been melted was found anywhere in the WTC complex there could have been no molten steel. Hot steel, glowing steel and glowing steel dripping molten glass(which has been documented), but NO MOLTEN STEEL no matter what some amateur claims.
Your going to have to do more than quote the misconceptions of amateurs to document molten steel. If it existed at all it would be obvious because it would flow to the lowest point and cool into puddles, none of which were found, nor were any removed by some vast gov't conspiracy.
Grumpy
Grumpy:
I can't get over the hypocracy of this: The OCTs' are married to the "experts' at #7, yet call all others liars.
I can't get over the hypocracy of this: The OCTs' are married to the "experts' at #7, yet call all others liars.
Molten Steel Quotes
1
- Recovery worker reflects on months spent at Ground Zero
Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service
May 29, 2002
[...] When [Joe] O'Toole signed on for trade center duty in January, he thought it would be a 30-day assignment. But after one month, he volunteered for another. And another. And another. And another.
[...] Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. "It was dripping from the molten steel," he said.
cache
2
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
Ground Zero was a disaster site like no other---with hazards everywhere. Shards of steel lay upon shards of steel, shifting and unstable, uncovering red hot metal beams excavated from deep beneath layers of sub-floors, exposing further dark crevasses.
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
3
Ironworkers' Job of Clearing Ground Zero Is Over, but the Trauma Lingers
By COREY KILGANNON
November 11, 2002
[...] The four men sat on a sunny sidewalk in Greenwich Village on a recent workday and ate their lunch staring at the steel skeleton of a building going up on West Third Street.
One of them commented on how much easier it was to eat a sandwich in front of steel that was strong and straight and new, not molten and mangled and laden with debris.
NYT
4
Reflections in the Wake of September 11:
Visit to Ground Zero, New York City
by Father Edward A. Malloy, CSC
[...] Eddie and I walked down into the depths of the South Tower, Building Two, which was the first to collapse. Large front end loaders were engaged in their task. Gigantic cranes were lifting pieces of steel weighing tons, some of which were being placed on the back of semi trucks. Firefighters atop a number of ladder trucks were spraying in the areas of greatest smoke. The average temperature beneath the rubble is said to be 1500 F. so that when steel is brought up it is molten and takes two or three days to cool down.
http://www.nd.edu/~ndmag/reflect/malloydiary.html
5
RICH GARLOCK: Going below, it was smoky and really hot. We had rescue teams with meters for oxygen and carbon dioxide. They also had temperature monitors. Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running.
PBS, September 2002
6
TWO WEEKS AT GROUND ZERO
By Guy Lounsbury
[...] My particular part was to help maintain security in and around the perimeter of the site.
[...] Two weeks after the attack, one fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains.
home.nycap.rr.com
7
At Ground Zero
NIH'ers Respond to Tragedy in NYC
By Rich McManus
Photos by Van Hubbard, Susan Orsega, Rich McManus
[...] Ed Pfister's Diary:
[...] I spent several hours tonight, walking "the pile" and attempting to soak it all in for the last time and find a bit of closure...deep below ground a portion of the pile was still on fire and boiled with molten material. Sometimes, open flame would erupt as a crane pulled debris out and air rushed in. Fire hoses constantly poured streams of water causing huge billowing steam clouds to rise up over the site into the huge lights above.
http://www.nih.gov/news/NIH-Record/10_30_2001/story01.htm
8
Reluctant hero narrates horror of N.Y. mission
September 11, 2002
[...] Interim Bryan Fire Department Chief Mike Donoho was one of those sent to "ground zero," as the World Trade Center site quickly became known. [...] Here is Donoho's story, as told to Eagle staff writer John LeBas:
[...] What you had were large columns of steel that were just stuck into massive amounts of molten steel and other metals, that had just fused together from the heat and bonded together from the strength of the collapse.
We dug and we dug and we dug, and we cut and we cut and we cut, and we did not see anything that resembled any type of furniture, any type of personal belongings. We found some pieces of things like a telephone, things like that. I think we found credit cards a few times, and we found a couple of stuffed animals. But you would expect to see, like, a bunch of desks, a bunch of chairs. The only way I can explain it is, if you take a car and put it in one of those machines where they crush it and make it look like a cube, and you can't recognize what it is, that's what the whole area looked like. It looked like a massive, molten mess that had been fused together, like a car that had been cubed and crushed.
With all that heavy, heavy stuff, there were wires, rebar, concrete. Most of it was just steel. A lot of what we were walking on was just molten steel.
http://www.theeagle.com/septanniv/091102firefighter.htm
Selective reasoning, at best.
QUOTE
Get over yourself, you do not know more than the experts that were on the scene.
I can't get over the hypocracy of this: The OCTs' are married to the "experts' at #7, yet call all others liars.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Get over yourself, you do not know more than the experts that were on the scene. |
I can't get over the hypocracy of this: The OCTs' are married to the "experts' at #7, yet call all others liars.
Molten Steel Quotes
1
- Recovery worker reflects on months spent at Ground Zero
Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service
May 29, 2002
[...] When [Joe] O'Toole signed on for trade center duty in January, he thought it would be a 30-day assignment. But after one month, he volunteered for another. And another. And another. And another.
[...] Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. "It was dripping from the molten steel," he said.
cache
2
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
Ground Zero was a disaster site like no other---with hazards everywhere. Shards of steel lay upon shards of steel, shifting and unstable, uncovering red hot metal beams excavated from deep beneath layers of sub-floors, exposing further dark crevasses.
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
3
Ironworkers' Job of Clearing Ground Zero Is Over, but the Trauma Lingers
By COREY KILGANNON
November 11, 2002
[...] The four men sat on a sunny sidewalk in Greenwich Village on a recent workday and ate their lunch staring at the steel skeleton of a building going up on West Third Street.
One of them commented on how much easier it was to eat a sandwich in front of steel that was strong and straight and new, not molten and mangled and laden with debris.
NYT
4
Reflections in the Wake of September 11:
Visit to Ground Zero, New York City
by Father Edward A. Malloy, CSC
[...] Eddie and I walked down into the depths of the South Tower, Building Two, which was the first to collapse. Large front end loaders were engaged in their task. Gigantic cranes were lifting pieces of steel weighing tons, some of which were being placed on the back of semi trucks. Firefighters atop a number of ladder trucks were spraying in the areas of greatest smoke. The average temperature beneath the rubble is said to be 1500 F. so that when steel is brought up it is molten and takes two or three days to cool down.
http://www.nd.edu/~ndmag/reflect/malloydiary.html
5
RICH GARLOCK: Going below, it was smoky and really hot. We had rescue teams with meters for oxygen and carbon dioxide. They also had temperature monitors. Here WTC 6 is over my head. The debris past the columns was red-hot, molten, running.
PBS, September 2002
6
TWO WEEKS AT GROUND ZERO
By Guy Lounsbury
[...] My particular part was to help maintain security in and around the perimeter of the site.
[...] Two weeks after the attack, one fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains.
home.nycap.rr.com
7
At Ground Zero
NIH'ers Respond to Tragedy in NYC
By Rich McManus
Photos by Van Hubbard, Susan Orsega, Rich McManus
[...] Ed Pfister's Diary:
[...] I spent several hours tonight, walking "the pile" and attempting to soak it all in for the last time and find a bit of closure...deep below ground a portion of the pile was still on fire and boiled with molten material. Sometimes, open flame would erupt as a crane pulled debris out and air rushed in. Fire hoses constantly poured streams of water causing huge billowing steam clouds to rise up over the site into the huge lights above.
http://www.nih.gov/news/NIH-Record/10_30_2001/story01.htm
8
Reluctant hero narrates horror of N.Y. mission
September 11, 2002
[...] Interim Bryan Fire Department Chief Mike Donoho was one of those sent to "ground zero," as the World Trade Center site quickly became known. [...] Here is Donoho's story, as told to Eagle staff writer John LeBas:
[...] What you had were large columns of steel that were just stuck into massive amounts of molten steel and other metals, that had just fused together from the heat and bonded together from the strength of the collapse.
We dug and we dug and we dug, and we cut and we cut and we cut, and we did not see anything that resembled any type of furniture, any type of personal belongings. We found some pieces of things like a telephone, things like that. I think we found credit cards a few times, and we found a couple of stuffed animals. But you would expect to see, like, a bunch of desks, a bunch of chairs. The only way I can explain it is, if you take a car and put it in one of those machines where they crush it and make it look like a cube, and you can't recognize what it is, that's what the whole area looked like. It looked like a massive, molten mess that had been fused together, like a car that had been cubed and crushed.
With all that heavy, heavy stuff, there were wires, rebar, concrete. Most of it was just steel. A lot of what we were walking on was just molten steel.
http://www.theeagle.com/septanniv/091102firefighter.htm
Selective reasoning, at best.
roves shill --- Since the upper exterior walls (and floors) fell down on the lower floors, the truss seats failed vertically. NIST documented this. Its in some part of the NCSTAR1-5 section.
molten steel --- I still have not read any conclusive evidence for melted, liquid steel. The fire chemistry was exceedingly complex. There were plenty of other materials which could become liquid at around (1000+273) K, the known temperature of the so-called hot spots.
Just because somebody says "molten steel" does not make it true.
molten steel --- I still have not read any conclusive evidence for melted, liquid steel. The fire chemistry was exceedingly complex. There were plenty of other materials which could become liquid at around (1000+273) K, the known temperature of the so-called hot spots.
Just because somebody says "molten steel" does not make it true.
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 08:20 PM)
roves shill --- Since the upper exterior walls (and floors) fell down on the lower floors, the truss seats failed vertically. NIST documented this. Its in some part of the NCSTAR1-5 section.
molten steel --- I still have not read any conclusive evidence for melted, liquid steel. The fire chemistry was exceedingly complex. There were plenty of other materials which could become liquid at around (1000+273) K, the known temperature of the so-called hot spots.
Just because somebody says "molten steel" does not make it true.
I say the same thing about the damage to WTC 7. Just because someone said it, doesn't make it true.
molten steel --- I still have not read any conclusive evidence for melted, liquid steel. The fire chemistry was exceedingly complex. There were plenty of other materials which could become liquid at around (1000+273) K, the known temperature of the so-called hot spots.
Just because somebody says "molten steel" does not make it true.
I say the same thing about the damage to WTC 7. Just because someone said it, doesn't make it true.
AceBaker:
About your Aman Zafar picture "puzzle":
I see no problem with this picture..... only a slight optical illusion.
First you need to determine were the central axis of WTC 1 would have been. On enlargements of the picture you can actually see the base of WTC 1 still standing just to the right of WFC 2, (the domed Merrill Lynch building at the water's edge). Now extend the base of WTC 1 vertically and you will find that the dust plume was actually quite symmetrical.
If there is any asymmetry at all it comes from the ejection of debris not to the north but to the north-west! So the big "blob" of dust and debris you are so concerned about was actually moving more towards the photographer than to his left. This is the debris that fell towards the Winter Garden (which you can also see in the picture), and we already know the west wall of WTC 1 "peeled off" like a banana skin and landed across West Street at the foot of the Winter Garden.
So sorry Ace, you need to find something else to prove whatever it is you are trying to prove!
NF
About your Aman Zafar picture "puzzle":
I see no problem with this picture..... only a slight optical illusion.
First you need to determine were the central axis of WTC 1 would have been. On enlargements of the picture you can actually see the base of WTC 1 still standing just to the right of WFC 2, (the domed Merrill Lynch building at the water's edge). Now extend the base of WTC 1 vertically and you will find that the dust plume was actually quite symmetrical.
If there is any asymmetry at all it comes from the ejection of debris not to the north but to the north-west! So the big "blob" of dust and debris you are so concerned about was actually moving more towards the photographer than to his left. This is the debris that fell towards the Winter Garden (which you can also see in the picture), and we already know the west wall of WTC 1 "peeled off" like a banana skin and landed across West Street at the foot of the Winter Garden.
So sorry Ace, you need to find something else to prove whatever it is you are trying to prove!
NF
DBB:
I've seen the NIST sagging truss claim. Like a suspended hammock. I haven't seen any other documented faluire.
QUOTE
roves shill --- Since the upper exterior walls (and floors) fell down on the lower floors, the truss seats failed vertically. NIST documented this. Its in some part of the NCSTAR1-5 section.
I've seen the NIST sagging truss claim. Like a suspended hammock. I haven't seen any other documented faluire.
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 08:20 PM)
roves shill --- Since the upper exterior walls (and floors) fell down on the lower floors, the truss seats failed vertically. NIST documented this. Its in some part of the NCSTAR1-5 section.
molten steel --- I still have not read any conclusive evidence for melted, liquid steel. The fire chemistry was exceedingly complex. There were plenty of other materials which could become liquid at around (1000+273) K, the known temperature of the so-called hot spots.
Just because somebody says "molten steel" does not make it true.
What I find funny is I work with red hot steel all the time, and it never flows, it has to be bright yellow to white hot before it will flow as a liquid.
That is some thing CTers love to point out by the way!
http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/culture/sc...iron_steel.html
The very fact that they used the term red hot shows that it could not be iron or steel. It has to be bright yellow before it will flow, the material in question is simply to cool to be steel or iron.
Thermite could not have created that much iron for that long a time anyway, the only possible explanation even if molten steel was formed is a longer lasting reaction, in the rubble pile.
Also DBB. I talked to my engineer friend again on the fracture wave model, he said the only difference in the models is probably that he factored in the stiffness and weight of the reinforced floors. he did not have time for a more detailed description.
If he was right then it would make the fracture wave model not fit the data, and in-fact to fast using the proper calculations.
Fracture waves according to him, and his model are just to fast, although he did say that some would undoubtedly have occurred later on in the collapse, once the momentum built up to a certain point, and the debris had sufficient momentum.
molten steel --- I still have not read any conclusive evidence for melted, liquid steel. The fire chemistry was exceedingly complex. There were plenty of other materials which could become liquid at around (1000+273) K, the known temperature of the so-called hot spots.
Just because somebody says "molten steel" does not make it true.
What I find funny is I work with red hot steel all the time, and it never flows, it has to be bright yellow to white hot before it will flow as a liquid.
That is some thing CTers love to point out by the way!
http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/culture/sc...iron_steel.html
QUOTE
The temperature inside the furnace is a critical variable. Most early smelters in Europe could no reach average temperatures of about 700 degrees. Now pure iron has a very high melting point, about 1530 degrees. So when the newly-formed mass of iron coalesces at 700 degrees, it remains a red-hot, slightly plastic solid called a bloom. The smith can hammer on this hot mass to shape it (and to make it extrude lumps of impurities that it might otherwise congeal around).
The bloomery type of smelter must produce wrought iron. No carbon can dissolve in the iron bloom at 700 degrees. But what happens if we start raising the temperature inside the carbon-rich conditions of the smelter? Simplistically, we would expect to have to get to about 1500 degrees before the bloom would start to melt. But this isn't the case at all.
At much lower temperatures, around 1150-1200 degrees, the iron starts to flow as a liquid. What has happened is one of the great "tricks" of physics -- a so-called eutectic point. When the temperature in a smelter rises, more and more carbon is absorbed by the iron. At about 3.5% carbon content, the iron-carbon alloy has a melting point much lower than either element would have by itself. It liquifies and begins to try to flow out of the furnace.
The bloomery type of smelter must produce wrought iron. No carbon can dissolve in the iron bloom at 700 degrees. But what happens if we start raising the temperature inside the carbon-rich conditions of the smelter? Simplistically, we would expect to have to get to about 1500 degrees before the bloom would start to melt. But this isn't the case at all.
At much lower temperatures, around 1150-1200 degrees, the iron starts to flow as a liquid. What has happened is one of the great "tricks" of physics -- a so-called eutectic point. When the temperature in a smelter rises, more and more carbon is absorbed by the iron. At about 3.5% carbon content, the iron-carbon alloy has a melting point much lower than either element would have by itself. It liquifies and begins to try to flow out of the furnace.
The very fact that they used the term red hot shows that it could not be iron or steel. It has to be bright yellow before it will flow, the material in question is simply to cool to be steel or iron.
Thermite could not have created that much iron for that long a time anyway, the only possible explanation even if molten steel was formed is a longer lasting reaction, in the rubble pile.
Also DBB. I talked to my engineer friend again on the fracture wave model, he said the only difference in the models is probably that he factored in the stiffness and weight of the reinforced floors. he did not have time for a more detailed description.
If he was right then it would make the fracture wave model not fit the data, and in-fact to fast using the proper calculations.
Fracture waves according to him, and his model are just to fast, although he did say that some would undoubtedly have occurred later on in the collapse, once the momentum built up to a certain point, and the debris had sufficient momentum.
QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 15 2007, 08:34 PM)
I've seen the NIST sagging truss claim. Like a suspended hammock. I haven't seen any other documented faluire[sic].
What is your point? There is a graphic of a wall section in some Figure which shows that below the tower split into two parts the truss seats failed vertically and above the truss seats failed randomly.
Sorry, but I don't have the full reference available.
What is your point?
There is a graphic of a wall section in some Figure which shows that below the tower split into two parts the truss seats failed vertically and above the truss seats failed randomly.Sorry, but I don't have the full reference available.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ground%20zero
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...02732&dict=CALD
http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/...ion/ground+zero
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/ground%2520zero.html
according to microsoft, it's now a proper name, and a new meaning...
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_701706385/Ground_Zero.html
http://www.bartleby.com/61/61/G0286100.html
in fact, ALL of the dictionaries agree that before 911, ground zero meant pretty much one thing9with a few alternate slang uses), ie. the point directly below a nuclear blast. so, who started calling it ground zero?
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-gro3.htm
'eager reporters' claims one online dictionary. yet, no one who knows is saying exactly who started using this term, or why it became so ubiquitous. it was 'the pile' to clean-up workers.
big brother spread his mighty leathern wings on 911...
http://911review.com/coverup/dcang.html
'COVER-UP', luckily, still has one meaning.
the (underground, center of the core) nuke angle is not going away anytime soon.
of course, it's been 'repeatedly debunked', but so has kennedy's assassination, and we ALL know there was more than one shooter. good doublethink is the hallmark of good modern corporate citizenry in our free society.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp...02732&dict=CALD
http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/...ion/ground+zero
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/ground%2520zero.html
according to microsoft, it's now a proper name, and a new meaning...
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_701706385/Ground_Zero.html
http://www.bartleby.com/61/61/G0286100.html
in fact, ALL of the dictionaries agree that before 911, ground zero meant pretty much one thing9with a few alternate slang uses), ie. the point directly below a nuclear blast. so, who started calling it ground zero?
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-gro3.htm
'eager reporters' claims one online dictionary. yet, no one who knows is saying exactly who started using this term, or why it became so ubiquitous. it was 'the pile' to clean-up workers.
big brother spread his mighty leathern wings on 911...
http://911review.com/coverup/dcang.html
'COVER-UP', luckily, still has one meaning.
the (underground, center of the core) nuke angle is not going away anytime soon.
of course, it's been 'repeatedly debunked', but so has kennedy's assassination, and we ALL know there was more than one shooter. good doublethink is the hallmark of good modern corporate citizenry in our free society.
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 09:21 PM)
What is your point? There is a graphic of a wall section in some Figure which shows that below the tower split into two parts the truss seats failed vertically and above the truss seats failed randomly.
Sorry, but I don't have the full reference available.
But because you post, it becomes undeniable truth? It is your theory DBB. That is it. You don't have any proof of it. You have a graphic, somewhere.
There is a graphic of a wall section in some Figure which shows that below the tower split into two parts the truss seats failed vertically and above the truss seats failed randomly.Sorry, but I don't have the full reference available.
But because you post, it becomes undeniable truth? It is your theory DBB. That is it. You don't have any proof of it. You have a graphic, somewhere.
QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 15 2007, 09:32 PM)
But because you post, it becomes undeniable truth? It is your theory DBB. That is it. You don't have any proof of it. You have a graphic, somewhere.
Balderdash. I posted that it is somewhere in the 1-5 section of the report. If I remember what Arthur posted about it, this figure is even discussed in the text.
If you are too lazy to go look, that's you, not me.
Balderdash. I posted that it is somewhere in the 1-5 section of the report. If I remember what Arthur posted about it, this figure is even discussed in the text.
If you are too lazy to go look, that's you, not me.
Just to be clear: we are dismissing testimony in this video (1:21), among numerous other accounts, concerning the molten metal. But are required to accept the testimony of the damage to WTC 7 was enough to initiate global collapse?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...oss+video&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...oss+video&hl=en
Chainsaw brought up the Electra crash
I found this part interesting on many levels.
How many parallels can YOU find?
Arthur
The airliner's fuselage emerged from the black cloud minus its entire right wing and with only a large stub of the left wing still attached. ....
It struck a soybean field at 618 miles an hour. Mud, dirt, grass, shrubs and mottled snow were tossed two hundred and fifty feet in the air. The debris fell back around a muddy crater forty feet wide. From this gaping wound in the earth poured smouldering smoke. There were pieces of wreckage around the perfectly formed rim. Some other metal fragments were hurled 1500 ft away but the one-hundred-foot fuselage itself had disappeared.
In the crater, buried twelve feet under this smoking devil's caldron, was what was left of Northwest Airlines Flight 710 and the 33 men, 21 woman and 8 children and 1 infant aboard.
...
But the residue from Flight 710 was something even the most veteran investigtors had never come across before. There were no bodies.
Newsmen arriving on the scene quickly noticed that the shirts, towels, women's slips, and other items of clothng were hanging from nearby trees. Quite naturally they phoned in the gory news that the clothes had been stripped from the victims' bodies by the explosive impact. Their observation was accurate but their analysis faulty. The items draped on the tree branches were from a bale of old clothing that Northwest was shipping to its maintenance shop in Miami for grease rags. When impact burst open the baggage compartment, the assorted clothing was flung into the air and fluttered down among the trees.
Where were the victims? Masked workers wearing plastic gloves dug into the smoking crater. They dug down a full twelve feet before they found what they were seeking. The huge fuselage had telescoped and compressed into a mass of molten metal only one third its original length. Of the sixty-three occupants, there was not enough left to identify - eventually - more than seven bodies. The aluminum fuselage that was their coffin was so hot that five days later a steam shovel picked up pieces that still were burning.
From The Electra Story
Aviation's Greatest Mystery
By Robert Sterling - 1963
I found this part interesting on many levels.
How many parallels can YOU find?
Arthur
The airliner's fuselage emerged from the black cloud minus its entire right wing and with only a large stub of the left wing still attached. ....
It struck a soybean field at 618 miles an hour. Mud, dirt, grass, shrubs and mottled snow were tossed two hundred and fifty feet in the air. The debris fell back around a muddy crater forty feet wide. From this gaping wound in the earth poured smouldering smoke. There were pieces of wreckage around the perfectly formed rim. Some other metal fragments were hurled 1500 ft away but the one-hundred-foot fuselage itself had disappeared.
In the crater, buried twelve feet under this smoking devil's caldron, was what was left of Northwest Airlines Flight 710 and the 33 men, 21 woman and 8 children and 1 infant aboard.
...
But the residue from Flight 710 was something even the most veteran investigtors had never come across before. There were no bodies.
Newsmen arriving on the scene quickly noticed that the shirts, towels, women's slips, and other items of clothng were hanging from nearby trees. Quite naturally they phoned in the gory news that the clothes had been stripped from the victims' bodies by the explosive impact. Their observation was accurate but their analysis faulty. The items draped on the tree branches were from a bale of old clothing that Northwest was shipping to its maintenance shop in Miami for grease rags. When impact burst open the baggage compartment, the assorted clothing was flung into the air and fluttered down among the trees.
Where were the victims? Masked workers wearing plastic gloves dug into the smoking crater. They dug down a full twelve feet before they found what they were seeking. The huge fuselage had telescoped and compressed into a mass of molten metal only one third its original length. Of the sixty-three occupants, there was not enough left to identify - eventually - more than seven bodies. The aluminum fuselage that was their coffin was so hot that five days later a steam shovel picked up pieces that still were burning.
From The Electra Story
Aviation's Greatest Mystery
By Robert Sterling - 1963
QUOTE (reasonwhy+Feb 15 2007, 05:37 PM)
This is the first time I will agree with you Grumster, I am an amateur. I am not a pro (paid) as the shills on this forum are.
What is amusing is how bad the amateur's are kicking the pros a$$ in the debate.
I posted a report dated from when they still had engineers and temperature monitors at Groud Zero to verify the accuracy (it was used to help with the quick evidence removal and destruction):
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=177904
The only response was from the homo-promoter claiming it was Rockwool (firesafe insulation)!
Rock would really add to the fires!
reasonwhy, in your case it's homo supporter.
Try to stay focused, the subject is molten material, not fuel, so go take those rocks out of your fireplace.
Rock wool was the main ingredient in the SFRM and ceiling tiles used in the towers, so you would expect to find lots of it in the debris pile.
Consider this comment from your partner, roves shill.
Consider this comment from your partner, roves shill.
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
The key point being that this crash took place in 1963, barely ten years after DNA was first discovered and years before it would be used for identification. Beyond that, the crash was reputed to be at over 600 mph....way beyond the speed of a gravity collapse.
Given modern DNA techniques, it isn't unreasonable to assume that perhaps all of the unfortunate people aboard that flight might have been identified. If 1963 identification technology was all that was used at WTC, then the numbers show that perhaps a few dozen or so people are all that could have been identified.
I, unfortunately, have witnessed a friend hit firm ground after a fall of over 5,000 feet. Speed at impact was somewhere around 120-130 mph. Condition of the body looked like someone had laid down for a nap with various deformities noticeable at closer inspection.
Getting over 1,000 bodies reduced to a point where there isn't a big enough piece to put in a test tube and doing it with only the energy from gravity powered rubble available to do the work is a pretty tall order.
What is amusing is how bad the amateur's are kicking the pros a$$ in the debate.
I posted a report dated from when they still had engineers and temperature monitors at Groud Zero to verify the accuracy (it was used to help with the quick evidence removal and destruction):
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=177904
The only response was from the homo-promoter claiming it was Rockwool (firesafe insulation)!
Rock would really add to the fires!
reasonwhy, in your case it's homo supporter.
Try to stay focused, the subject is molten material, not fuel, so go take those rocks out of your fireplace.
Rock wool was the main ingredient in the SFRM and ceiling tiles used in the towers, so you would expect to find lots of it in the debris pile.
QUOTE
What are the major uses for rock and slag wool insulations?
The physical and chemical properties of mineral wool insulation, also known as rock and slag wool, are major factors in their utility. Because the fibers are non-combustible and have melting temperatures in excess of 1800-2000º F, they are used to prevent the spread of fire. As a primary constituent of ceiling tile and sprayed fire proofing, rock and slag wool products supply fire protection, as well as sound control and attenuation.
The physical and chemical properties of mineral wool insulation, also known as rock and slag wool, are major factors in their utility. Because the fibers are non-combustible and have melting temperatures in excess of 1800-2000º F, they are used to prevent the spread of fire. As a primary constituent of ceiling tile and sprayed fire proofing, rock and slag wool products supply fire protection, as well as sound control and attenuation.
Consider this comment from your partner, roves shill.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| What are the major uses for rock and slag wool insulations? The physical and chemical properties of mineral wool insulation, also known as rock and slag wool, are major factors in their utility. Because the fibers are non-combustible and have melting temperatures in excess of 1800-2000º F, they are used to prevent the spread of fire. As a primary constituent of ceiling tile and sprayed fire proofing, rock and slag wool products supply fire protection, as well as sound control and attenuation. |
Consider this comment from your partner, roves shill.
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
The heated glass and rock wool in the debris pile would be very similar to lava.
From Wikipedia:
From Wikipedia:
QUOTE
Lava is molten rock expelled by a volcano during an eruption. Magma is molten rock below the earth's surface. Lava, when first exuded from a volcanic vent, is a liquid at temperatures from 700 °C to 1,200 °C (1,300 °F to 2,200 °F). Although lava is quite viscous, about 100,000 times the viscosity of water, it can flow great distances before cooling and solidifying.
QUOTE (einsteen+Feb 15 2007, 03:30 PM)
That was what I also thought but didn't say, you exactly said what I was thinking. In the past there was also a wedge discussion here, i.e. an effect pressing out the perimeter columns (I have to say that I still have no picture of the official collapse, an animation or emulation would be so nice but for NIST the initiation is what matters) but that is also a related problem, after a few collected floors the angles are effectively zero.
To try and visualize things, I thought I'd try and animate some gifs. As can be seen this is the block falls on tower model where collapse initiation is not considered.
Here's what Greening's E1 model looks like:
each floor absorbs just enough energy E1 from the kinetic energy of the block to fail, including core and perimeter columns. The floors below are unaffected.
Here's what I feel would happen (without explosives at least )
The impact causes the buckling of columns (and compression - so small, that it's not shown). One of the core columns fails at a weak spot. Due to the column deformation, the floors collapse. I'm not convinced even the floors would collapse all the way down. But in any case, the core and perimeter columns remain standing.
Again, this is not a proof of anything, just trying to visualize things. I would be very interested if others in this forum were to present something similar to show how they see the collapse proceeding. (I did these drawings in openoffice draw downloadable free from openoffice.org)
To try and visualize things, I thought I'd try and animate some gifs. As can be seen this is the block falls on tower model where collapse initiation is not considered.
Here's what Greening's E1 model looks like:
each floor absorbs just enough energy E1 from the kinetic energy of the block to fail, including core and perimeter columns. The floors below are unaffected.
Here's what I feel would happen (without explosives at least
)The impact causes the buckling of columns (and compression - so small, that it's not shown). One of the core columns fails at a weak spot. Due to the column deformation, the floors collapse. I'm not convinced even the floors would collapse all the way down. But in any case, the core and perimeter columns remain standing.
Again, this is not a proof of anything, just trying to visualize things. I would be very interested if others in this forum were to present something similar to show how they see the collapse proceeding. (I did these drawings in openoffice draw downloadable free from openoffice.org)
You better give this to someone else Palpatane: NOT MINE.
Consider this comment from your partner, roves shill.
QUOTE
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
Consider this comment from your partner, roves shill.
QUOTE
[...] A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, [Ron] Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. "Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen's and the thousands who fled that disaster," he said. "It could have been a tornado or an avalanche or a volcano."
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 09:38 PM)
Balderdash. I posted that it is somewhere in the 1-5 section of the report. If I remember what Arthur posted about it, this figure is even discussed in the text.
If you are too lazy to go look, that's you, not me.
Is not in this section: NIST NCSTAR 1-5.
If you are too lazy to go look, that's you, not me.
Is not in this section: NIST NCSTAR 1-5.
QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 15 2007, 10:33 PM)
Is not in this section: NIST NCSTAR 1-5.
Try 1-5A or maybe 1-5B.
Try 1-5A or maybe 1-5B.
lozenge124 --- Those are nice graphics. Now for some physics.
Height of each floor: 3.6576 meters (12 ft)
Acceleration due to gravity: 9.80665 m/s^2
Speed after being accelerated at constant a through d meters: s = sqrt(2ad)
Kinetic energy at speed s: (1/2)ms^2 = (ma)d
mass specific kinetic energy of top block = 35.86 J/kg
For WTC 1 this is 35.86(14+8.8) = 817.6 J/kg when impacting the first unaffected story.
Wow!
Just how do you propose consuming all of this energy so that the collapse of the top block is arrested?
Height of each floor: 3.6576 meters (12 ft)
Acceleration due to gravity: 9.80665 m/s^2
Speed after being accelerated at constant a through d meters: s = sqrt(2ad)
Kinetic energy at speed s: (1/2)ms^2 = (ma)d
mass specific kinetic energy of top block = 35.86 J/kg
For WTC 1 this is 35.86(14+8.8) = 817.6 J/kg when impacting the first unaffected story.
Wow!
Just how do you propose consuming all of this energy so that the collapse of the top block is arrested?
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 10:50 PM)
lozenge124 --- Those are nice graphics. Now for some physics.
Height of each floor: 3.6576 meters (12 ft)
Acceleration due to gravity: 9.80665 m/s^2
Speed after being accelerated at constant a through d meters: s = sqrt(2ad)
Kinetic energy at speed s: (1/2)ms^2 = (ma)d
mass specific kinetic energy of top block = 35.86 J/kg
For WTC 1 this is 35.86(14+8.8) = 817.6 J/kg when impacting the first unaffected story.
Wow!
Just how do you propose consuming all of this energy so that the collapse of the top block is arrested?
Why don't you show us what your interpretation of the progressive collapse would look like? It 's very easy to make these little schematics.
If you don't feel comfortable making an animated gif, you can post each frame as a separate image.
I think it would be more interesting then handwaving with g to 5 decimals.
If you're really feeling adventurous, a schematic sequence of collapse initiation would be fun too...
Height of each floor: 3.6576 meters (12 ft)
Acceleration due to gravity: 9.80665 m/s^2
Speed after being accelerated at constant a through d meters: s = sqrt(2ad)
Kinetic energy at speed s: (1/2)ms^2 = (ma)d
mass specific kinetic energy of top block = 35.86 J/kg
For WTC 1 this is 35.86(14+8.8) = 817.6 J/kg when impacting the first unaffected story.
Wow!
Just how do you propose consuming all of this energy so that the collapse of the top block is arrested?
Why don't you show us what your interpretation of the progressive collapse would look like? It 's very easy to make these little schematics.
If you don't feel comfortable making an animated gif, you can post each frame as a separate image.
I think it would be more interesting then handwaving with g to 5 decimals.
If you're really feeling adventurous, a schematic sequence of collapse initiation would be fun too...
QUOTE (David B. Benson+Feb 15 2007, 10:50 PM)
lozenge124 --- Those are nice graphics. Now for some physics.
Height of each floor: 3.6576 meters (12 ft)
Acceleration due to gravity: 9.80665 m/s^2
Speed after being accelerated at constant a through d meters: s = sqrt(2ad)
Kinetic energy at speed s: (1/2)ms^2 = (ma)d
mass specific kinetic energy of top block = 35.86 J/kg
For WTC 1 this is 35.86(14+8.8) = 817.6 J/kg when impacting the first unaffected story.
Wow!
Just how do you propose consuming all of this energy so that the collapse of the top block is arrested?
once again, a whole storey just 'disappeared' in your math.
unreal.
Height of each floor: 3.6576 meters (12 ft)
Acceleration due to gravity: 9.80665 m/s^2
Speed after being accelerated at constant a through d meters: s = sqrt(2ad)
Kinetic energy at speed s: (1/2)ms^2 = (ma)d
mass specific kinetic energy of top block = 35.86 J/kg
For WTC 1 this is 35.86(14+8.8) = 817.6 J/kg when impacting the first unaffected story.
Wow!
Just how do you propose consuming all of this energy so that the collapse of the top block is arrested?
once again, a whole storey just 'disappeared' in your math.
unreal.
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 15 2007, 11:08 PM)
Why don't you show us what your interpretation of the progressive collapse would look like? ...
I think it would be more interesting then[sic] handwaving with g to 5 decimals.
If you're really feeling adventurous, a schematic sequence of collapse initiation would be fun too...
Your first graphic is quite good, although it leaves out the tilt. For graphs of drop versus time, see Greening's "Energy Transfer" paper and also Bazant & Verdure's paper.
It wasn't handwaving. The value of g is the one professionally used, but not corrected for geodesy in the vicinity of NYC.
Explain your last sentence, please. Thank you.
======================================
newton --- That's what lozenge124 wanted to do. I claim that the first impacted story offered about (1/3)g resistance at every stage, so that the drop proceeded at very close to (2/3)g, for the entire first 3.0 seconds (WTC 1).
I think it would be more interesting then[sic] handwaving with g to 5 decimals.
If you're really feeling adventurous, a schematic sequence of collapse initiation would be fun too...
Your first graphic is quite good, although it leaves out the tilt. For graphs of drop versus time, see Greening's "Energy Transfer" paper and also Bazant & Verdure's paper.
It wasn't handwaving. The value of g is the one professionally used, but not corrected for geodesy in the vicinity of NYC.
Explain your last sentence, please. Thank you.
======================================
newton --- That's what lozenge124 wanted to do. I claim that the first impacted story offered about (1/3)g resistance at every stage, so that the drop proceeded at very close to (2/3)g, for the entire first 3.0 seconds (WTC 1).
QUOTE
Of the sixty-three occupants, there was not enough left to identify - eventually - more than seven bodies.
The key point being that this crash took place in 1963, barely ten years after DNA was first discovered and years before it would be used for identification. Beyond that, the crash was reputed to be at over 600 mph....way beyond the speed of a gravity collapse.
Given modern DNA techniques, it isn't unreasonable to assume that perhaps all of the unfortunate people aboard that flight might have been identified. If 1963 identification technology was all that was used at WTC, then the numbers show that perhaps a few dozen or so people are all that could have been identified.
I, unfortunately, have witnessed a friend hit firm ground after a fall of over 5,000 feet. Speed at impact was somewhere around 120-130 mph. Condition of the body looked like someone had laid down for a nap with various deformities noticeable at closer inspection.
Getting over 1,000 bodies reduced to a point where there isn't a big enough piece to put in a test tube and doing it with only the energy from gravity powered rubble available to do the work is a pretty tall order.
QUOTE (NEU-FONZE+Feb 15 2007, 08:28 PM)
AceBaker:
About your Aman Zafar picture "puzzle":
I see no problem with this picture..... only a slight optical illusion.
First you need to determine were the central axis of WTC 1 would have been. On enlargements of the picture you can actually see the base of WTC 1 still standing just to the right of WFC 2, (the domed Merrill Lynch building at the water's edge). Now extend the base of WTC 1 vertically and you will find that the dust plume was actually quite symmetrical.
If there is any asymmetry at all it comes from the ejection of debris not to the north but to the north-west! So the big "blob" of dust and debris you are so concerned about was actually moving more towards the photographer than to his left. This is the debris that fell towards the Winter Garden (which you can also see in the picture), and we already know the west wall of WTC 1 "peeled off" like a banana skin and landed across West Street at the foot of the Winter Garden.
So sorry Ace, you need to find something else to prove whatever it is you are trying to prove!
NF
Here is the Zafar picture in 3 frames, white dotted lines indicate the approx lines of the building, then red ones follow the path of the debris. I think it is clear that material from the west face of WTC1, that is the side that is facing the camera, is fallling down and to the left, that is north. Why? Why? Why?
About your Aman Zafar picture "puzzle":
I see no problem with this picture..... only a slight optical illusion.
First you need to determine were the central axis of WTC 1 would have been. On enlargements of the picture you can actually see the base of WTC 1 still standing just to the right of WFC 2, (the domed Merrill Lynch building at the water's edge). Now extend the base of WTC 1 vertically and you will find that the dust plume was actually quite symmetrical.
If there is any asymmetry at all it comes from the ejection of debris not to the north but to the north-west! So the big "blob" of dust and debris you are so concerned about was actually moving more towards the photographer than to his left. This is the debris that fell towards the Winter Garden (which you can also see in the picture), and we already know the west wall of WTC 1 "peeled off" like a banana skin and landed across West Street at the foot of the Winter Garden.
So sorry Ace, you need to find something else to prove whatever it is you are trying to prove!
NF
Here is the Zafar picture in 3 frames, white dotted lines indicate the approx lines of the building, then red ones follow the path of the debris. I think it is clear that material from the west face of WTC1, that is the side that is facing the camera, is fallling down and to the left, that is north. Why? Why? Why?
AceBaker --- The collapse is not completely symmetric. It did not start out completely symmetric.
Still, your presentation was helpful.
Still, your presentation was helpful.
QUOTE (AceBaker+Feb 15 2007, 08:01 PM)
Why? Why? Why?
Just HAD to have been an Orbital Beam Weapon.
Now ACE has the PROOF.
Arthur
Just HAD to have been an Orbital Beam Weapon.
Now ACE has the PROOF.
Arthur
I think you are full of balderdash DBB, NIST has clearly stated their job was to show hypothesize events leading up to the point of collapse initiation. I don't think you have graphic or anything else other than a theory. John Gross stating the NIST mission:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...oss+video&hl=en
Hot spots:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...oss+video&hl=en
Hot spots:
QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 15 2007, 08:46 PM)
I think you are full of balderdash DBB, NIST has clearly stated their job was to show hypothesize events leading up to the point of collapse initiation. I don't think you have graphic or anything else other than a theory. John Gross stating the NIST mission:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...oss+video&hl=en
Hot spots:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...oss+video&hl=en
Hot spots:
forthetrees
To make a stupid statement is one thing, we all have done that. But to continue making the same stupid assertion in the face of definative proof of it's stupidity is something else. "only the energy from gravity powered rubble" is ignoring 6 months of 1000 degree heat, and that is just stupid. Bodies burn into ash in about 2 hours at that temperature, there are 2200 2 hour periods in 6 months.
Now, is there anything you don't understand about what I have written. I have tried to type real slow and use simple words and concepts but let me know if I can do anything else to help you with your obvious cognitive(means thinking) problem.
Grumpy
QUOTE
Getting over 1,000 bodies reduced to a point where there isn't a big enough piece to put in a test tube and doing it with only the energy from gravity powered rubble available to do the work is a pretty tall order.
To make a stupid statement is one thing, we all have done that. But to continue making the same stupid assertion in the face of definative proof of it's stupidity is something else. "only the energy from gravity powered rubble" is ignoring 6 months of 1000 degree heat, and that is just stupid. Bodies burn into ash in about 2 hours at that temperature, there are 2200 2 hour periods in 6 months.
Now, is there anything you don't understand about what I have written. I have tried to type real slow and use simple words and concepts but let me know if I can do anything else to help you with your obvious cognitive(means thinking) problem.
Grumpy
Now for the more complex reality of the collapse...
http://www.debunking911.com/collapsesim.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/sim1.gif
http://www.debunking911.com/pivot.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/collapse.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/collapsesim.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/sim1.gif
http://www.debunking911.com/pivot.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/collapse.htm
WTC 1 and WFC 3 faces were PARALLEL.
Thus the exterior wall of WTC 1 is falling to the left of the frame as seen by the picture taker.
Arthur
Thus the exterior wall of WTC 1 is falling to the left of the frame as seen by the picture taker.
Arthur
So these went through the building, and ended up in lower Manhattan........
roves shill --- NCSTAR1-3A
3.5.3 Summary, page 119 (169 ordinal)
Figure 3--51a, page 182 (232 ordinal)
3.5.3 Summary, page 119 (169 ordinal)
Figure 3--51a, page 182 (232 ordinal)
Arthur:
WFC 3 was parallel to WTC 1 , but WFC 2 was parallel to West street. West street runs almost true north while the west face of WTC 1 is inclined about 10 degrees to the east of West Street. This face aligns almost perfectly with the Winter Garden.
Aman Zafar's photograph was taken looking slightly north of due east. The debris cloud marked by AB is falling mostly towards the Winter Garden suggesting to me that we are looking at the collapse of the west face of WTC 1 as it fell approx west by north west.
AceBaker:
It is interesting to mark where the top of WTC 1 would have been on Aman Zafar's picture prior to collpase.
NF
WFC 3 was parallel to WTC 1 , but WFC 2 was parallel to West street. West street runs almost true north while the west face of WTC 1 is inclined about 10 degrees to the east of West Street. This face aligns almost perfectly with the Winter Garden.
Aman Zafar's photograph was taken looking slightly north of due east. The debris cloud marked by AB is falling mostly towards the Winter Garden suggesting to me that we are looking at the collapse of the west face of WTC 1 as it fell approx west by north west.
AceBaker:
It is interesting to mark where the top of WTC 1 would have been on Aman Zafar's picture prior to collpase.
NF
QUOTE (roves shill+Feb 15 2007, 09:35 PM)
So these went through the building, and ended up in lower Manhattan........
The towers WERE in lower manhattan. Heh! And yeah, they went through the building and landed on the street.
Questioning why the HARDEST parts of the plane would go though the building seems retarded to me. Heh!
The towers WERE in lower manhattan. Heh! And yeah, they went through the building and landed on the street.
Questioning why the HARDEST parts of the plane would go though the building seems retarded to me. Heh!
I believe anyone wishing to believe that post collapse fire is the reason for the condition of all the missing bodies is very much at odds with the Chief Medical Examiner for the City of New York.
They're also at odds with....
And, beyond six months of exposure to fire, there has not yet been a reasonable answer to questions of where the energy came from and how it was applied. It's just basic physics, really.
Oh yeah...almost forgot to mention the fact that personal attacks are used in direct proportion to the lack of confidence the attacker has in their own position.
They're also at odds with....
QUOTE
...Dr. Michael Baden, the state's chief forensic pathologist and a top expert in the field, said in September that most bodies should be identifiable because the fires – while hot enough to melt steel – did not reach the 3,200-degree, 30-minute level necessary to incinerate a body.
And, beyond six months of exposure to fire, there has not yet been a reasonable answer to questions of where the energy came from and how it was applied. It's just basic physics, really.
Oh yeah...almost forgot to mention the fact that personal attacks are used in direct proportion to the lack of confidence the attacker has in their own position.
QUOTE (forthetrees+Feb 16 2007, 12:20 AM)
I believe anyone wishing to believe that post collapse fire is the reason for the condition of all the missing bodies is very much at odds with the Chief Medical Examiner for the City of New York.
They're also at odds with....
And, beyond six months of exposure to fire, there has not yet been a reasonable answer to questions of where the energy came from and how it was applied. It's just basic physics, really.
Note, he said this in SEPTEMBER.
He was OBVIOUSLY talking about the FIRES IN THE TOWERS.
He COULD NOT KNOW at that time that it would be over 3 months before the fires burning in the rubble pile would be put out or that it would take over 6 months to complete the removal of debris.
Arthur
They're also at odds with....
QUOTE
...Dr. Michael Baden, the state's chief forensic pathologist and a top expert in the field, said in September that most bodies should be identifiable because the fires – while hot enough to melt steel – did not reach the 3,200-degree, 30-minute level necessary to incinerate a body.
And, beyond six months of exposure to fire, there has not yet been a reasonable answer to questions of where the energy came from and how it was applied. It's just basic physics, really.
Note, he said this in SEPTEMBER.
He was OBVIOUSLY talking about the FIRES IN THE TOWERS.
He COULD NOT KNOW at that time that it would be over 3 months before the fires burning in the rubble pile would be put out or that it would take over 6 months to complete the removal of debris.
Arthur
Lozenge 124:
In your model/schematic of the collapse of the WTC,
the core and perimeter columns remain standing!
But that didn't happen;
so I guess that rules out your model....
and favors the other (first) model!
Unless you can suggest
a third model?
NF
In your model/schematic of the collapse of the WTC,
the core and perimeter columns remain standing!
But that didn't happen;
so I guess that rules out your model....
and favors the other (first) model!
Unless you can suggest
a third model?
NF
QUOTE (NEU-FONZE+Feb 16 2007, 12:52 PM)
Lozenge 124:
In your model/schematic of the collapse of the WTC,
the core and perimeter columns remain standing!
But that didn't happen;
so I guess that rules out your model....
and favors the other (first) model!
Unless you can suggest
a third model?
NF
Indeed.
That is the motivation behind the explosives hypothesis. It is very hard to envision how the core and perimeter could collapse under gravity alone.
In your model/schematic of the collapse of the WTC,
the core and perimeter columns remain standing!
But that didn't happen;
so I guess that rules out your model....
and favors the other (first) model!
Unless you can suggest
a third model?
NF
Indeed.
That is the motivation behind the explosives hypothesis. It is very hard to envision how the core and perimeter could collapse under gravity alone.
QUOTE (lozenge124+Feb 16 2007, 09:15 AM)
That is the motivation behind the explosives hypothesis. It is very hard to envision how the core and perimeter could collapse under gravity alone.
LACK OF VISION is your Motivation?
ONCE AGAIN, we see a poster reach the COMPETENCE BARRIER.
The one that people who are incompetent in physics apparently CAN'T cross.
A CT'er is simply one whose general incompetence prevents them from realizing this.
Arthur
LACK OF VISION is your Motivation?
ONCE AGAIN, we see a poster reach the COMPETENCE BARRIER.
The one that people who are incompetent in physics apparently CAN'T cross.
A CT'er is simply one whose general incompetence prevents them from realizing this.
Arthur
lozenge124
The motivation behind the "explosives hypothesis" is partially an ignorance of the physics involved, partially the "feeling" some have that this couldn't be the results of some cave-dwelling barbarian's nefarious plans and must be a vast conspiracy of(put name of least favorite gov't agency here) for (put appropriate motive here) using (put type of device/substance, real or imaginary here) and partially the profit motive of some shady/failed scientific people and site admins to squeeze money from the sad misguided souls who buy their snake oil(my new video is available here for just $19.95 + S+H, get your T-shirt here)...(Oh, there's a new conference in San Diego where you can see Prof. Jone say the same thing as is on his video, but live!!! Get your tickets here, local motels also have a special rate just for you[I get a kickback], make your reservations now.).
For the first two types(ignorance and pseudo-science based on feelings) we can do something about here. As for the snake oil salesmen and their victims, well, let's just say they deserve each other.
Grumpy
QUOTE
Indeed.
That is the motivation behind the explosives hypothesis. It is very hard to envision how the core and perimeter could collapse under gravity alone.
That is the motivation behind the explosives hypothesis. It is very hard to envision how the core and perimeter could collapse under gravity alone.
The motivation behind the "explosives hypothesis" is partially an ignorance of the physics involved, partially the "feeling" some have that this couldn't be the results of some cave-dwelling barbarian's nefarious plans and must be a vast conspiracy of(put name of least favorite gov't agency here) for (put appropriate motive here) using (put type of device/substance, real or imaginary here) and partially the profit motive of some shady/failed scientific people and site admins to squeeze money from the sad misguided souls who buy their snake oil(my new video is available here for just $19.95 + S+H, get your T-shirt here)...(Oh, there's a new conference in San Diego where you can see Prof. Jone say the same thing as is on his video, but live!!! Get your tickets here, local motels also have a special rate just for you[I get a kickback], make your reservations now.).
For the first two types(ignorance and pseudo-science based on feelings) we can do something about here. As for the snake oil salesmen and their victims, well, let's just say they deserve each other.
Grumpy
Regarding Gordon's remarks:
"Gordon Ross 23rd February 2006:
The author (Greening) examines the distance over which the failure load would act and these figures he gives are around 0.11 metres (p31)from a storey height of 3.7m. So he contends that after less than 3% of its length the columns would thereafter offer no further resistance to the falling mass. This contradicts accepted theory most notably contained within BZ that a minimum 3% vertical deflection would be required to even initiate buckling points. BZ show that the required force reduces from that point but it does not at any time fall below 25% of the initial failure value.
The author has identified the strain energy requirement for the first 3% of the vertical deflection of the buckling columns. We know from BZ that the remaining 97% of the vertical deflection will require a further energy input of some ten times this amount. So using a very rough approximation we can argue that the energy requirement is of the order of some ten times greater than the value used by the author."
---------------------
There are a couple of errors with Gordon's claim. Gordon is confusing Greening's slamming distance of 0.11 m with BZ's 3% bulk deformation distance. Greening uses an effective distance over which a dynamic load much larger than the yield load operates during slamming for the purpose of calculating the slowing effect of E1 on the collapse rate. That doesn't make his value of E1 ten times smaller than BZ's Wp.
Greening's dynamic load is about 30 times greater than the static load but acts through about 1/30th the distance (0.11m or about 3% of h). The integral of Greening's dynamic load over his effective distance is the energy E1 needed to fail the columns, which is comparable to the value of Wp that can be calculated using BZ's approach. Both are on the order of 0.5 GJ per story at the 96th level.
BV use a constant average crushing force Fc over one story height to account for the slowing effect of E1. I've used this approach and the dynamic load approach in Greening's algebraic model and they give the same collapse duration, so there isn't the problem that Gordon claims.
"Gordon Ross 23rd February 2006:
The author (Greening) examines the distance over which the failure load would act and these figures he gives are around 0.11 metres (p31)from a storey height of 3.7m. So he contends that after less than 3% of its length the columns would thereafter offer no further resistance to the falling mass. This contradicts accepted theory most notably contained within BZ that a minimum 3% vertical deflection would be required to even initiate buckling points. BZ show that the required force reduces from that point but it does not at any time fall below 25% of the initial failure value.
The author has identified the strain energy requirement for the first 3% of the vertical deflection of the buckling columns. We know from BZ that the remaining 97% of the vertical deflection will require a further energy input of some ten times this amount. So using a very rough approximation we can argue that the energy requirement is of the order of some ten times greater than the value used by the author."
---------------------
There are a couple of errors with Gordon's claim. Gordon is confusing Greening's slamming distance of 0.11 m with BZ's 3% bulk deformation distance. Greening uses an effective distance over which a dynamic load much larger than the yield load operates during slamming for the purpose of calculating the slowing effect of E1 on the collapse rate. That doesn't make his value of E1 ten times smaller than BZ's Wp.
Greening's dynamic load is about 30 times greater than the static load but acts through about 1/30th the distance (0.11m or about 3% of h). The integral of Greening's dynamic load over his effective distance is the energy E1 needed to fail the columns, which is comparable to the value of Wp that can be calculated using BZ's approach. Both are on the order of 0.5 GJ per story at the 96th level.
BV use a constant average crushing force Fc over one story height to account for the slowing effect of E1. I've used this approach and the dynamic load approach in Greening's algebraic model and they give the same collapse duration, so there isn't the problem that Gordon claims.
Part of the basis for the claim that Greening's value of E1 is ten times too small is a faulty assumption by Gordon that the normalized load-displacement curve in Figure 5 of BZ which bottoms out at 0.25 is a proper curve to use for all columns. The energy dissipated in bending the column hinges at the 96th level isn't an order of magnitude greater than the 3% bulk deformation if the proper values of Mp are used for the towers.
Mp is the full plastic bending moment and is a measure of how difficult it is to bend a hinge. The graph that BZ show appears to be a generic curve used as an example. BZ state a value of Mp of 0.3 MN-m for perimeter columns at the 83rd level. For a column with a plastic bending moment Mp of about 0.2 to 0.3 MN-m, the curve bottoms out much lower than 0.25. For an Mp of 0.22 MN-m it bottoms out near 0.05 and the value of Wp obtained from that curve is about 0.5 GJ and comparable to Greening's value of E1.
Mp is the full plastic bending moment and is a measure of how difficult it is to bend a hinge. The graph that BZ show appears to be a generic curve used as an example. BZ state a value of Mp of 0.3 MN-m for perimeter columns at the 83rd level. For a column with a plastic bending moment Mp of about 0.2 to 0.3 MN-m, the curve bottoms out much lower than 0.25. For an Mp of 0.22 MN-m it bottoms out near 0.05 and the value of Wp obtained from that curve is about 0.5 GJ and comparable to Greening's value of E1.
Lozenge,
Indeed some people say that the core was still standing, which i.m.o. makes the story even more complex because the core of the falling block becomes tangled with it. And you can understand that at the first point of collapse initiation they really touch each other very well. A realistic model should have a crush-up and a crush-down at the same time (not the same rate), immediately after collapse initiation and not when the bulk reaches the ground.
I've tried to work out how it will behave in a stepwise model, consuming E1 per storey, but that leads to big problems.
If we assume the block of 14 floors falls a storey (near freefall) then by symmetry of the problem the elastic (energy "absorbing") properties are the same for the building and the block. If each storey requires about 0.5GJ then for a sufficient amount of stories we can stop the discussion because then it stops.
Assume now that the elastic wave (or how they call it) can only reach the distance of a storey the problems is also a problem. In the first collision two times 0.5GJ is required, but I really don't understand this model, because if the block is able to "hammer" the building also is able to "hammer" back. If you assume the block hammers you assume the full mass contributes, i.e. the full momentum, kinetic energy contibutes, which implies that there is nothing stepwise because that would imply that only the lowest hammering floor contributes.
Now a wedge effect is something different but if two vectors 1 and 2 are not aligned why would A wedge B and B not wedge A if you know what I mean.
As far as I can understand (at a quick look) is the Bazant paper in fact Greening for a uniform mass and energy distribution. I was shocked when I saw those pictures about crush-down and crush-up. I hoped they had solved that also. Did they ? Could someone help explaining it a little bit ? Theoretically a crush-up and crush-down from the beginning should also be able to continue [?], however much more mass will be ejected. It is also not easy how this mass loss/ejected will occur. A percentage per collision of course gives a different result than a percentage per floor per collision. Lozenge, you indeed first need a realistic model to start but in general analytic solvable models need special assumptions.
Indeed some people say that the core was still standing, which i.m.o. makes the story even more complex because the core of the falling block becomes tangled with it. And you can understand that at the first point of collapse initiation they really touch each other very well. A realistic model should have a crush-up and a crush-down at the same time (not the same rate), immediately after collapse initiation and not when the bulk reaches the ground.
I've tried to work out how it will behave in a stepwise model, consuming E1 per storey, but that leads to big problems.
If we assume the block of 14 floors falls a storey (near freefall) then by symmetry of the problem the elastic (energy "absorbing") properties are the same for the building and the block. If each storey requires about 0.5GJ then for a sufficient amount of stories we can stop the discussion because then it stops.
Assume now that the elastic wave (or how they call it) can only reach the distance of a storey the problems is also a problem. In the first collision two times 0.5GJ is required, but I really don't understand this model, because if the block is able to "hammer" the building also is able to "hammer" back. If you assume the block hammers you assume the full mass contributes, i.e. the full momentum, kinetic energy contibutes, which implies that there is nothing stepwise because that would imply that only the lowest hammering floor contributes.
Now a wedge effect is something different but if two vectors 1 and 2 are not aligned why would A wedge B and B not wedge A if you know what I mean.
As far as I can understand (at a quick look) is the Bazant paper in fact Greening for a uniform mass and energy distribution. I was shocked when I saw those pictures about crush-down and crush-up. I hoped they had solved that also. Did they ? Could someone help explaining it a little bit ? Theoretically a crush-up and crush-down from the beginning should also be able to continue [?], however much more mass will be ejected. It is also not easy how this mass loss/ejected will occur. A percentage per collision of course gives a different result than a percentage per floor per collision. Lozenge, you indeed first need a realistic model to start but in general analytic solvable models need special assumptions.
QUOTE (einsteen+Feb 16 2007, 10:42 PM)
... A realistic model should have a crush-up and a crush-down at the same time (not the same rate), immediately after collapse initiation and not when the bulk reaches the ground. ... Theoretically a crush-up and crush-down from the beginning should also be able to continue [?], ...
Bezant & Verdure explain the very interesting reason why a simultaneous crush-down and crush-up cannot occur, except possible right at collapse initiation, when some crush-up might occur.
Indeed, it appears that for at least WTC 1, some crush-up occurred at collapse initiation. I am not so knowledgeable as to say anything about this matter regarding WTC 2.
Bezant & Verdure explain the very interesting reason why a simultaneous crush-down and crush-up cannot occur, except possible right at collapse initiation, when some crush-up might occur.
Indeed, it appears that for at least WTC 1, some crush-up occurred at collapse initiation. I am not so knowledgeable as to say anything about this matter regarding WTC 2.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.