See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Magnetic forces to blame for 9/11 tower collapse
Source:
The Independent
URL Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s ... 911-tower-collapse-924509.html
Published: Jul 24, 2009
Author: Steve Connor
Post Date: 2009-07-24 16:54:32 by Lysander_Spooner
Keywords: None
Views: 1395
Comments: 119
Magnetic forces to blame for 9/11 tower collapse By Steve Connor Wednesday, 10 September 2008 Scientists can finally explain why the Twin Towers collapsed on September 11, despite the temperature of the fires being well below the 1,500C melting point of the steel girders holding up the buildings. The discovery that unusual magnetic forces within the girders made them weak at temperatures of about 500C explains away the conspiracy theories that have spread like wildfire since the disaster. Sergei Dudarev, of the UK Atomic Energy Agency, found that steel loses its strength above 500C because its molecules undergo a physical transition from one state to another due to magnetic fluctuations. "The steel didn't melt, it just became soft. It is an unusual state and the temperatures in the Twin Towers were high enough to cause it because the thermal insulation was knocked off the girders through the impact with the aircraft," he said. "Understanding how materials behave means we can find the right 'medicine' to make steel stronger at high temperatures... and if our work can be used for other applications, such as safeguarding tall buildings against disasters, so much the better," he said.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 23.
#23. To: Lysander_Spooner (#0)
Being raised in a steel mill town, I have known since I was a kid that steel quickly loses its strength when heated. It's why I laugh at the ignoramuses who in their ignorance babble about remote-controlled planes and explosives in the WTC.
#24. To: Turdle, Turtle, christine, FormerLurker, Wudidiz, TwentyTwelve, all (#23)
(Edited)
And so Jeenyus you can explain to us the exact mechanism which produced sufficient heat to bring down the towers (despite the fact that FEMA and NIST have been unable to do so). Hint: Only 2 of the 3 Towers were hit by planes, and the fires were limited in extent to several floors. Your job is to: A. Explain in detail (show your work) how the heat was generated. B. Explain in detail how it caused a uniform failure in the structure in a 360 degree radius thus initiating a collapse identical to what one would see in a controlled demolition. C. Explain in detail the exact physical mechanism which resulted in there being near molten debris after 8 WEEKS. Get back to us when you've got it all nailed down jeenyus.
All the steel didn't heat at the same rate. If the steel got weak at one point it would have fallen over instead of pancaking. Add that to the reports of firemen of bombs being in building. Add the fact tha it fell at freefall speeds without resistance from the floors belown. Add to the fact that the building that got hit with more fuel took longer to "collapse. It doesn't add up.
It will be repeated again and again, as often as necessary, that it takes quite nearly twice the heat of a building fire to weaken construction steel to the point of catastrophic failure. Look at fires that destroyed Building 5 as well as high rise towers in Madrid, Bogota and Beijing in recent years. All of these structures were totaled due to fire, and all of them were left standing.
Sorry Turtle, you are right on some things but not this one. Yes, steel when heated loses strength, but does not explode, disintigrate and create pyroclastic flow. "ignoramuses", neat, I guess I am one with a double degree in Physics and Chemistry and Doctoral degree in Medicine. UR just way off on this one Turtle.
You got more bullshit than a bull! Does not matter what the topic, the person, or place, you have done it all. Talk about ignoramuses! You are the biggest bragadoccio on this forum and 99/44% of it is a figment of your imagination. The next thing you will claim is that you taught Einstein. Why don't you just stick to playing with your
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Replies to Comment # 23.
#26. To: Turtle (#23)
Being raised in a steel mill town, I have known since I was a kid that steel quickly loses its strength when heated. It's why I laugh at the ignoramuses who in their ignorance babble about remote-controlled planes and explosives in the WTC.
#27. To: Turtle (#23)
(Edited)
#32. To: Turtle (#23)
(Edited)
steel quickly loses its strength when heated
#110. To: Turtle, All (#23)
Being raised in a steel mill town, I have known since I was a kid that steel quickly loses its strength when heated.
pud pug?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 23.