waverider said:
8) You should consider that it has been calculated that if the entire 10,000 gallons of jet fuel from the aircraft was injected into just one floor of the World Trade Center, that the jet fuel burnt with the perfect efficency, that no hot gases left this floor and that no heat escaped this floor by conduction, then the jet fuel could have only raised the temperature of this floor to, at the very most, 536°F (280°C). You can find the calculation here.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/WTC_ch2.htm
Waverider, I'll try to tone it down. Your example here does not impress me. Thermodynamic calculations are never exact. If I take 10 lb of coal and throw it into a closed system, ignite it, and watch the heat rise, I'll get some theoretically perfect value. The real world system of the towers is very different.
Without reading the novel on your link, let me toss these out. Maybe they're addressed, maybe not.
First: Why limit the calculation to the fuel? The trim, furnishings, walls, everything except the steel... all fireproof? When the fires started, of course they will spread and the combustibles within the buildings will burn, adding to the energy of the event.
Second: The draft. When you blow on a campfire's coals, the heat output rises dramatically. The winds alone at those elevations were probably high. Add to it the incredible draft created by the rising heat, and the core of the fire will probably rise to incandescence. When Tokyo was firebombed, dinky little incendiary explosives eventually transformed into a firestorm, with wind speeds, from outside to in, eventually knocking people off their feet. The draft effect is huge. A blacksmith can forge and weld iron and steel with a charcoal fire when draft is added.
Third: Initial damage to the girders from the kinetic energy of the crash sets the stage for the ultimate collapse.
Finally, to paraphrase occam's razor:
"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations."
You still haven't postulated on the
why. The U.S. Govt may be bumbling in some ways, but generally covert operations, when executed, are kept simple. The reason - the commanders of such operations know that simpler is better, and more likely to be successful. This fictional "operation" is outrageously complex - a rube goldberg chain of events - and would never be executed when a simpler method, like my VX scenario, would achieve the same results.
I have heard goofy theories that the towers supposed explosives were planted by private interests who were privy to the plans of al quaeda. Assuming your values are correct, and less than 10,000 lb of explosives were used,
how in the world did even 8,000lb of blasting explosive get placed perfectly for what would have been far and away the largest and most complex controlled demolition in the history of man, without anyone noting or getting suspicious? Have you ever seen a pallet of 8,000lb? it's not a trivial amount.
The "explosions" noted by "expert" witnesses were nothing more than the steel girders themselved catastrophically failing. In a materials lab, we used to stress tiny 3/16" diameter steel samples in a hydraulic test rig and stress them to failure. That little 3/16" rod literally bangs like an M-80 when it lets go.
I am at a loss as to why people look for bigfoot and ET within acts of man. Somehow people get a little internal "rush" when they think there's some deep and spooky explanation to a simple, tragic event.
Bad guys hijacked airplanes, screamed allah akhbar, rammed the towers. The towers failed structurally. That's all.
It's Kid C back from the grave!
