[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
911 Title: Did Chemical Reactions Cause Twin Towers Collapse? PARIS — A mix of sprinkling system water and melted aluminium from aircraft hulls likely triggered the explosions that felled New York's Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, a materials expert has told a technology conference. "If my theory is correct, tonnes of aluminium ran down through the towers, where the smelt came into contact with a few hundred litres of water," Christian Simensen, a scientist at SINTEF, an independent technology research institute based in Norway, said in a statement released Wednesday. "From other disasters and experiments carried out by the aluminium industry, we know that reactions of this sort lead to violent explosions." The official report blames the collapse on the over-heating and failure of the structural steel beams at the core of the buildings, an explanation Simensen rejects. Given the quantities of the molten metal involved, the blasts would have been powerful enough to blow out an entire section of each building, he said. This, in turn, would lead to the top section of each tower to fall down on the sections below. The sheer weight of the top floors would be enough to crush the lower part of the building like a house of card, he said. The aluminium-water scenario would also account for explosions from within the buildings just prior to their collapse that have fuelled conspiracy theories suggesting that the structures had been booby-trapped. Simensen presented his theory at an international materials technology conference in San Diego, California, and has detailed his calculations in an article published in the trade journal Aluminium International Today. "The aluminium industry had reported more than 250 aluminium-water explosions since 1980," he said. In a controlled experiment carried out by Alcoa Aluminium, 20 kilos (44 pounds) of molten aluminium was allowed to react with 20 litres of water, along with a small quantity of rust. "The explosion destroyed the entire laboratory and left a crater 30 metres (100 feet) in diameter," Simensen said. By comparison, the aircraft carried 30 tonnes of aluminium into each of the towers, according to his calculations. Simensen speculates that the two commercial jets were immediately trapped inside an insulating layer of building debris within the skyscrapers. The debris -- especially plaster, which blocks the transfer of heat -- would have formed a shield protecting the rest of the building. At the same time, however, it would created a super-hot, oven-like zone around the aircraft, heated by burning fuel. Aluminium alloy, which in jet hulls also contains magnesium, melts at 660 degrees Celsius (1,220 degrees Fahrenheit). If heated to 750 C (1382 F), the alloy "becomes as liquid as water," Simensen said. This molten aluminium could then have flowed downward through staircases and gaps in the floor, causing a chemical reaction with water from sprinklers on the levels below. The mix would immediately boost temperatures by several hundred degrees, releasing combustible hydrogen in the process. Such reactions are even more powerful in the presence of rust or other catalysts, which can boost temperatures to more than 1,500 C (2,700 F). A meltdown period of 30 to 45 minutes would also be consistent with the timing of the explosions and subsequent collapse of both buildings in relation to the moment of impact. Simensen said there are lessons to be learned, if his theory is correct, that could help avoid a similar disaster were another skyscraper to be hit by a big jet. "We could develop means of rapidly emptying sprinkler systems in the floors beneath the point of impact," he said. Firing a rocket with fire-retardant that could coat the aircraft body could also help prevent metal alloy from melting. Poster Comment: There now you see, all perfectly logical. /sarcasm Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest The sheer weight of the top floors would be enough to crush the lower part of the building like a house of card, he said. Contrary: the following by physics teacher David Chandler. http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/ChandlerDownwardAccelerationOfWTC1.pdf
Destruction of the World Trade Center North Tower and Fundamental Physics
#2. To: Brian S (#0) That is insane. Insanity is what happens when you refuse reality.
#3. To: nolu chan, All (#2) Controlled demolition. 50 ton press dissappears as supports blown away. Free Fall. All 3 bldgs. Never before. Never since....;}
#4. To: nolu chan (#1) downward acceleration of the falling upper block implies a downward net force, which requires that the upward resistive force was less than the weight of the block. Only a mindless pos could write - post such garbage ! The terrorists knew the total weight of the upper floors would consecutively crash the lower floors ! your mind is in tiddlywinks ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons are for girlie boys ! #5. To: BorisY (#4) Did the terrorists know that they could take a joy ride across Ohio and the Air Force wouldn't intercept them? Seems they would have went straight for the target instead of flying around in a hijacked plane. Or did they know that Andrews Air force's squadron would be out on the Atlantic Ocean that day, at that time?
#6. To: A K A Stone (#5) If everything works it proves evolution ! If everything isn't working it proves evolution is still working ! This is the ultimate answer for most people ! Why didn't the first three planes wait for them ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons are for girlie boys ! #7. To: nolu chan (#1)
I don't think a kook mind can be altered - saved ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons are for girlie boys ! #8. To: BorisY (#4) [Physics teacher David Chandler] downward acceleration of the falling upper block implies a downward net force, which requires that the upward resistive force was less than the weight of the block.
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/newtlaws/u2l4a.cfm
Newton's Third Law of Motion
#9. To: nolu chan (#8) [Physics teacher David Chandler] At some point the engineers design buildings at lower levels to be stronger to support the upper building floors - even less structural strength at higher heights ! The weight mass of upper floors falling increases ! Isn't inertia the 1st law of thermodynamics ! The greater force prevails ! Maybe you don't know the difference of a static structure versus dynamic structure ! The fact that gravity goes down too ! In outer space the parts would have floated apart ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons are for girlie boys ! #10. To: BorisY (#9) The weight mass of upper floors falling increases ! Can you tell me how many seconds it took the building to fall to the ground? Give me an honest number and how you got that number. Thanks.
#11. To: A K A Stone (#10) Science teaches that a lead ball - feather in a vacuum fall at the same speed ! I would say all three ! The wtt's infesterminally slower ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons are for girlie boys ! #12. To: All (#11) (Edited) The wtt's infesterminally slower ! some kind of non existent terminex word ! How about immeasurably slower (( same )) ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons are for girlie boys ! Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|