20-09-2011, 06:06 PM
Charles,
I don't think the towers were turned to dust. I know this is a common characterization of what occurred. I think that almost all the steel was not turned to dust or even melted. Most of the steel frame broke apart at the weaker connections/splices. Much of it was mangled when it feel from such heights and was battered by other heavy steel sections.
Virtually all the materials which lend themselves to crushing such as concrete, wall board, tiles, carpet and even flesh was ground and crushed... by the enormous mass - several hundred thousands of tons... leaving little recognizable.
A fair amount of paper seems to have managed to avoid getting crushed and floated around lower Manhattan... perhaps it was blown away and didn't stay put to be crushed??? There was enormous winds and air over pressure associated with the collapses.
Before we can look for a cause.. we need to accurately describe what actually happened. Saying the buildings turned to dust is not accurate.. only part of them did.
Jeffrey
I don't think the towers were turned to dust. I know this is a common characterization of what occurred. I think that almost all the steel was not turned to dust or even melted. Most of the steel frame broke apart at the weaker connections/splices. Much of it was mangled when it feel from such heights and was battered by other heavy steel sections.
Virtually all the materials which lend themselves to crushing such as concrete, wall board, tiles, carpet and even flesh was ground and crushed... by the enormous mass - several hundred thousands of tons... leaving little recognizable.
A fair amount of paper seems to have managed to avoid getting crushed and floated around lower Manhattan... perhaps it was blown away and didn't stay put to be crushed??? There was enormous winds and air over pressure associated with the collapses.
Before we can look for a cause.. we need to accurately describe what actually happened. Saying the buildings turned to dust is not accurate.. only part of them did.
Jeffrey