It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I'm not aware of any explosive material which will melt steel.
Originally posted by Griff
I believe there was enough PE to crash the building. But, that PE had to come from severed columns and not buckled columns. Buckled columns still give resistance. How much resistance would depend on the columns. But, it definitely would not be a 100% conversion from PE to KE.
Originally posted by ADVISOR
reply to post by Seymour Butz
I mentioned it because the thread author said;
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I'm not aware of any explosive material which will melt steel.
I was just pointing out thermite is an explosive material.
Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive
Originally posted by ADVISOR
reply to post by Seymour Butz
I mentioned it because the thread author said;
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I'm not aware of any explosive material which will melt steel.
I was just pointing out thermite is an explosive material.
Originally posted by ADVISOR
exploding from the rapid combustion.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
Read below from the very article you sourced.
From wiki sourced on previous page;
It is possible to start the reaction using a propane torch if done correctly. The torch can preheat the entire pile of thermite which will make it explode instead of burning slowly when it finally reaches ignition temperature.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
You're just argueing....
Originally posted by ADVISOR
My responce, which is "It's called thermite.". The thermite source was posted by Tentickles, my reply on page 3 says:
From wiki sourced on previous page;
It is possible to start the reaction using a propane torch if done correctly. The torch can preheat the entire pile of thermite which will make it explode instead of burning slowly when it finally reaches ignition temperature.
That source is mentioned because it was previously cited.
I know what thermite can and can not do. It is not used to explode generally, but it can explode.
Originally posted by ADVISOR
All I was pointing out is that thermite melts steel, and does explode.
Sorry if you don't to hear it, but is is true.
Originally posted by ADVISOR
Thermite, melts metal and explodes. That is all I was adding, no argument.
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
Did it?
Or did it deflagrate, and the more common term of "explosion" was attached to it?
Can a low speed deflagration be expected to cut columns?
Can "exploding thermite" be expected to give the burn rate of a high explosive, or of a deflagration?
Somewhere in the middle?
You have no idea?
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I don't know the exact quantity due to the number of variables involved.
It didn't have to be free-falling to have enough energy to overload the floors below.
? Perhaps for ease of calculation?
I don't believe that anyone is asserting that the conversion of PE to KE was 100% efficient. This would be impossible, even with explosives.
What percentage of columns do you think would have to be severed in order to initiate a collapse?
What percentage of columns do you think would have to buckle in order to initiate a collapse?
In terms of Dynamite I would estimate between 5 and 15 thousand sticks if there was no pre-weakening of the support structure.
Did you mean to ask "how much dynamite would be needed to collapse the columns that remained on the most severely damaged floor after the planes impacted?" My answer to that would be 0. What would yours be?
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I believe that the CD theories don't make sense, purely from an energy standpoint.
Originally posted by ADVISOR
Can a low speed deflagration be expected to cut columns?
Sure, if it burns hot enough. Since wiki was the source used, I'll keep useing that and show that "A full blown magnesium fire can burn over 5,400 °F (2,980 °C)", would that not cut columns?
Originally posted by Griff
1-If you can't quantify it, then how can you assume the second sentence is true?
2-It had to be pretty darn close for the collapses to maintain near free-fall speed.
3-Why should you have to ask these questions when our tax dollars paid for an investigation?
4-What if I said 1 thermobaric in the core was enough?
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
But this thread is about dynamite and/or other explosives needed..... so let's stick to that premise, eh?
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I've heard you state that you don't believe aluminum could damage steel......or something to that effect. What about copper?
fail /feɪl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [feyl] Show IPA Pronunciation–verb (used without object)
7. (of a building member, structure, machine part, etc.) to break, bend, crush, or be otherwise destroyed or made useless because of an excessive load....
dam⋅age /ˈdæmɪdʒ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [dam-ij] Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, -aged, -ag⋅ing. –noun
1. injury or harm that reduces value or usefulness: The storm did considerable damage to the crops.
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I don't know the exact quantity due to the number of variables involved.
It didn't have to be free-falling to have enough energy to overload the floors below.
If you can't quantify it, then how can you assume the second sentence is true?
Originally posted by Griff
? Perhaps for ease of calculation?
Let me tell you how scientific this is. It is not.
Originally posted by Griff
I don't believe that anyone is asserting that the conversion of PE to KE was 100% efficient. This would be impossible, even with explosives.
It had to be pretty darn close for the collapses to maintain near free-fall speed.
Originally posted by Griff
What percentage of columns do you think would have to be severed in order to initiate a collapse?
What percentage of columns do you think would have to buckle in order to initiate a collapse?
Ask your god NIST. I have no access to the structural documentation, money, or man-power that NIST has. Why should you have to ask these questions when our tax dollars paid for an investigation?
Originally posted by Griff
In terms of Dynamite I would estimate between 5 and 15 thousand sticks if there was no pre-weakening of the support structure.
Did you mean to ask "how much dynamite would be needed to collapse the columns that remained on the most severely damaged floor after the planes impacted?" My answer to that would be 0. What would yours be?
So, you would estimate between 5-15 thousand sticks of dynamite? Can you show us how you came to this number? Because if you yourself don't know the answer to your rhetorical question, then it becomes moot as you can not tell what we say is correct or not.
Originally posted by Griff
What if I said 1 thermobaric in the core was enough? How would you be able to prove me wrong, when you yourself don't know the answer?
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by adam_zapple
I've heard you state that you don't believe aluminum could damage steel......or something to that effect. What about copper?
Which material has more mass, copper or steel?
BUT, I didn't say aluminium couldn't 'damage' steel. You need to read more closely, because in science it's very important to fully understand the terminology, or you make yourself look silly... I said, aluminium will NOT cause steel to FAIL.