9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I

[Peter Lemkin]

Lemkin,

I am not a physicist, nor a chemist. I can't produce the calculations. You have asserted without proof that the heat produced by the communition from friction, abrading and grinding of 400,000 tons of building was not enough to either melt some metal and heat the debris to elevated temps which took months to cool. I think you are incorrect on this.

I realize that this sounds counter intuitive... the production of heat from a collapse. But if you have any experience in working in a shop, grinding, sanding, sawing, drilling and milling materials.. wood, metal... you name it... there is always a lot of heat produced from (destruction of material). Drill a hole in a sheet of steel and it is way too hot to touch. Same for concrete... the mechanical destruction releases heat. This is a fact.

Could this heat be concentrated to high enough temps to melt some metal? I think so. I can't offer a proof. Would the amount of heat raise the debris pile temps enough that it would take months to cool? I think so. How much long does it take to reduce the latent heat of 1 million tons of debris 1 degree? With water at room temp? With ambient air in contact being heated and *removing* some of the heat at the surface?

Take a hot iron frying pan and drop a bit of water on it.. it immediately boils off and hardly lowers the temperature of the pan. Take a million ton pan which is 15 or 20° warmer than the ambient air and shoot streams of water from fire hoses.... How much will this lower the temp of the million tons in a day? How many tons of water can one hose deposit on the pile in a day? How much of the pile is exposed to the water it shoots out?

I don't think you are appreciating the magnitude of the issues here or understand the physics involved.

here's a paper on heat transfer:

http://webserver.dmt.upm.es/~isidoro/tc3...elling.pdf

You are certainly correct on not understanding physics and the fundamental laws of entropy and thermodynamics. Energy can not be created. Calculations by most all physicists and chemists who've looked at the matter [I can provide the scientific papers and calculations] have shown that there was NOT...repeat NOT! enough energy in the potential gravitational energy of the building to either pulverize the building to the extent observed NOR to heat the contents to the point to melt steel...i.e. there was an external energy source other than gravity....it wasn't spaghetti..it was some explosive and exothermic agent...as nanothermite was found in the dust it is logical to assume that nanothermite was pre-planted in the three collapsed WTCs and set off [by computer control] on the day of. Anything other is only stalling on the truth. And by the way, how come you've been kicked out of so many '911 truth sites'? I am more than willing to expand on any of what I've said before.....but your unzip to allow the pancake [minus the syrup] is, IMHO, either grossly naive and self-serving, or [more likely] a knowing modified limited hangout for the perps of 911. Sorry. Our very nation's future depends on how we [as a group] see and respond to 911...and your 'view' IMHO is on the side of danger and allows the perps to get away.

NB - there are several kinds of PE [potential energy]. In a standard building and in the WTC buildings YOU push on others there is ONLY gravitational potential energy [released if and when the building's atoms fall downward]. Well, hate to tell you, but over and over again calculations show there is NOT enough gravitational potential energy to do either [let along BOTH] of observed evidence from 9-11. 1] Not enough to pulverize the concrete, gypsum and all inside but the largest steel beams not melted into dust - even throwing some of the beams, weighing tens of tons LATERALLY hundreds of yards. 2] not enough potential energy to cause heating sufficient to melt lead, let alone steel! Now there are other chemical sources of potential energy...such as explosives and cutting charges, et al.....nanothermite is a good example and one found in the dust [along with the residue of reacted nanothermite]. ONLY something like that would explain what was seen.

I'd almost believe you were just eccentric with your lone unzip theory were it not that every time someone opines against the official version of events YOU post to try to counter theirs [with just that subtle Sunsteinian let-me-put-in-just-a dollop-of-'doubt']...you have completely given yourself and your 'game' away, IMHO> You support the official version, even though you claim not to!