Destruction of the Twin Towers

Destruction of the Twin Towers

The Event

Alleged flight paths (lost to radar for part of trip)
The Event AA-11 & UA175 Flight Paths Alleged flight paths (lost to radar for part of trip)

The Event

The Event AA-11 Impact on WTC-1 One landing gear

The Event

Landing gear, engine, fuselage section
The Event UA-175 Impact on WTC-2 Landing gear, engine, fuselage section

The Stage

The Buildings: Layout World Trade Center Building 7 N North Tower
South Tower

The Buildings: Heights
World Trade Center The Buildings: Heights N 110 stories 47 stories

47 central core columns, 244 perimeter columns
WTC 1-2 Construction Columns 47 central core columns, 244 perimeter columns

Basement, first 10 floors of WTC1
WTC 1-2 Construction in Progress Basement, first 10 floors of WTC1

14”x36” near bottom, various smaller forms near top
WTC 1-2 Construction 47 Central Core Columns 14”x36” near bottom, various smaller forms near top

Diagonal- brace mounting points
WTC 1-2 Construction 244 Perimeter Columns Truss mounting points Diagonal- brace mounting points 3-column-3-floor assemblies alternating across 3 floors, connected by welded/bolted spandrel plates

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features
Perimeter cross-link strength Acting like a Roman arch over the hole

WTC 1-2 Construction Floor Support Trusses

Floor Support Trusses WTC 1-2 Construction Core column
Perimeter column loops stick up into grooves on metal deck, act as shear studs Core column Main trusses: these were double

Transverse truss: at right angles to main trusses
WTC 1-2 Construction Floor Support Trusses Transverse truss: at right angles to main trusses

“Hat” Truss WTC 1-2 Construction Floors 106-110:
Helps spread stress forces within core and between core and perimeter, and supports communications tower on top

The Reports

The Reports FEMA -- 2002 9/11 Commission -- 2004
NIST: National Institute of Science and Technology

FEMA Investigation/Report
Carried out by “volunteers” from the American Society of Civil Engineers Bush administration agency (Katrina) Headed by man who headed Okla.City bombing study No “authority to impound pieces of steel before they were recycled” No subpoena powers -- couldn’t get blueprints “The ‘official investigation’ blessed by FEMA ... is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure” -- Fire Engineering Magazine Basic theory: Impact and fire caused a “pancake” collapse Report+comment:

FEMA Investigation/Report
Conclusion: Pancaking (PBS)

9/11 Commission Report Chairmen: "fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11.” Provided intensely detailed description of situation in buildings and actions of emergency personnel Mentioned that the buildings collapsed (period)

NIST Report

Problems with NIST Report
Institutional -- NIST was politicized Coverage -- Only covered what they claim happened up until the beginning of “collapse;” virtually no analysis of what “inevitably” then happened -- wasn’t part of their assignment Evidence -- Used questionable computer model, used little (and ignored) real evidence Reality -- the “collapse” displayed too many features inconsistent with a gravity-driven model.

NIST Problems: Institutional
NIST had become “fully hijacked from the scientific into the political realm...scientists lost scientific independence and became little more than ‘hired guns.’...By 2001, everyone in NIST leadership had been trained to pay close heed to political pressures... Everything that came from the hired guns was by then routinely filtered through the front office and assessed for political implications before being released,” and was also scrutinized by the NSA, OMB, and the Commerce Department headquarters whistleblower (former NIST employee)

So, what did NIST say?

A Computer Model (ignored much physical evidence)
NIST’s approach A Computer Model (ignored much physical evidence)

NIST: Computer model approach
Set up three scenarios with assumptions representing different degrees of damage See which one creates collapse If none do, tweak the worst one further and divorce it further from empirical evidence by denigrating that evidence. Example: South damage range was 3-10 damaged columns, only using 10 did job

"Upon a preliminary examination of the middle case, it became clear that the towers would likely remain standing...[so] the most severe case ... was used for the global analysis of each tower.” NIST Final Report "To the extent the [severe-case] simulations deviated from the photographic evidence or eyewitness reports, the investigators adjusted the input.” NIST

"[A] fundamental problem with using computer simulation is the overwhelming temptation to manipulate the input data until one achieves the desired results. Thus what appears to be a conclusion is actually a premise... NIST tweaked the input and the buildings feel down” architect Eric Douglas

NIST’s sequence Plane impact Fires created tremendous heat
Severed some core columns Removed fireproofing from most core columns and much of floor-supporting trusses Fires created tremendous heat weakened core columns Caused floor trusses to weaken and sag, pulling in the perimeter columns, reducing peripheral support Global collapse commenced Top of tower above damage acted as pile driver Floors below couldn’t resist Out of thousands of pages, they only devoted a paragraph to this, with no indication of analysis of the process

NIST: Severed Core Columns
North: 6 severed, South: but: North hit higher, where columns weaker Only engines capable of such damage, but North hit head on, South off to side, so should have been other way around There is no actual visual record All NIST has is a computer model Only 256 pieces of steel out of thousands saved

NIST: About that steel... NIST, 2003: "adequate for purposes of the Investigation. Regions of impact and fire damage were emphasized in the selection of steel for the Investigation.” and steel analysis "includes...estimating the maximum temperature reached by available steel." BUT NIST, 2005: Steel is merely “sufficient for determining quality and mechanical properties”

NIST: Fire weakens steel
Fire Retardant Fire retardant coating good for 2 hours So have to assume massive dislodging of fire retardant by impact. NIST: of 47 core columns, FR dislodged on 43 in North, 39 in South. How know? No evidence, just 15 shotgun blasts at flat plates (not beams) in a plywood box.

Temperature Behavior Building is an interconnected grid of thousands of tons of steel Steel conducts heat (though not ideal) Therefore, building sucks heat away from any place that has heat locally applied to it Therefore, it takes a LONG time before steel temperature reaches local air temperature. But jet fuel was consumed within 15 minutes, and office fires tend to burn out in any one area after about 20 minutes.

Temperature claims Model: 1000°C only mins in any one place, otherwise 500°C NIST: physical evidence indicates max temp of any steel (not necessarily columns) was 600°C NIST: examination of perimeter steel indicated max was 250°C Core had less oxygen than perimeter, so likely not as hot, and no evidence that it actually did get that hot Structural steel begins to soften at 425°C Kinda problematic for a claim of weakened columns

Floor trusses sag Basic idea (I’ve seen two quoted) Sagging pulls in the perimeter columns Sagging doesn’t pull in the perimeter columns, but when they cool and contract, that happens Were they trusses or girders?

Floor trusses sag

Floor trusses sag (Creep note: happens at ~30% of melting point, in this case ~920°C, so shouldn’t have happened) Sag per model: w/creep: 44”, w/out creep: 24” Problem: NIST paid UL $250K to test truss behavior, max deflection was 4” NIST: UL tests weren’t representative, all had fireproofing Actually, all had LESS fireproofing than build specs This is a complex issue, and I’ve seen a lot of different takes on it.

Sagging trusses pull wall inward

Non-NIST Observation Sagging floors?
Trouble is, the floors at the perimeter walls could not have sagged if the trusses were able to pull in the walls.

Was there ENOUGH ENERGY available from a GRAVITY DRIVEN collapse
Let’s get technical ! Was there ENOUGH ENERGY available from a GRAVITY DRIVEN collapse for NIST’s “pile driver” to cause collapse? to expand the large, fast dust clouds? to throw heavy beams fast and far?

Let’s get technical ! Mind-numbing analytical details and calculations moved to the end of the presentation, where they may never be seen again . . .

So we got technical ! And guess what?
There was not ENOUGH ENERGY available for any of these theories or observations: NIST’s “pile driver” theory of collapse expansion of the large, fast dust clouds Heavy columns thrown far and fast

If gravity didn’t have what it takes, What did?

The Alternative Theory

The Alternative Theory: Definition
Controlled Demolition the bringing down of a building by the use of explosives/incendiaries to simultaneously remove critical supporting structure

The Alternative Theory: Immediate Objections
How on earth could “they” have moved enough explosives into those towers without being detected Too many people -- someone would have told The government might do some bad things, but it would never commit that heinous a crime

The Alternative Theory: Primary Response
A demonstrated fact should not be ignored or denied simply because there is no immediate explanation of its history (e.g., Jupiter’s moon Titan has methane in its atmosphere; we can demonstrate this, though we have no idea how it got there)

The Alternative Theory: Calling a Spade a Spade (WTC7)
Danny Jowenko, a Danish demolition expert not dependent on U.S. reputation and government contracts

The Alternative Theory: Features Consistent with Explosives, Inconsistent with Fire
Fall Rapid onset of destruction at jet impact point Straight-down symmetrical collapse Near-freefall acceleration through path of greatest resistance Large proportion of debris outside footprint Explosives/incendiaries Dismemberment of steel framework Lateral ejection of steel members up to 600’ Pyroclastic (suspension) clouds of pulverized concrete Evidence of high temperatures (molten metal, iron microspheres Chemical evidence of thermitic material

Sudden onset of destruction at point of impact WTC 1

Sudden onset of destruction at point of impact WTC 2

Straight-down Symmetrical Collapse WTC 1

Straight-down (almost) Symmetrical Collapse WTC 2 (slow)

Time of Descent Many different versions some (even 9/11 Commission) claiming 10 secs Jim Hoffman’s video timeline indicates 15 secs Even 15 too fast for overcoming obstacles at each story: destruction of the structural integrity pulverization of the concrete in the floor slabs, and other non-metallic objects acceleration of the remains outward or downward.

Near-Freefall Acceleration WTC 1

The Alternative Theory:
Debris Outside Footprint Heavy debris, perimeter columns Lighter debris X Perimeter columns outside debris radius FEMA report: WTC1-2 Debris

Dismemberment: Debris Pile

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Debris
Bone Fragments 2006: 750 found on roof of Deutsche Bank (250’ from WTC 1&2), each less than 1/2” long 2010: 72 found in 2 dump trucks of debris being sifted by forensics experts 2012: reports of some still being found Victims (as of May 2002) 2823 victims 289 whole bodies recovered as of May 2002 1053 individuals identified

Dismemberment: Core Obliteration Massive 1000’ structure of cross-braced thick steel columns were dismembered (North tower section survived only temporarily)

Dismemberment: Core Obliteration

Lateral Ejection Large pieces of the structures thrown horizontally long distances at high velocities (40-60 mph) perimeter column sticking out of the corner of WTC 3

Pyroclastic Dust Clouds “Pyroclastic” is used to describe volcanic dust clouds Fine particles (solids suspended in air) Hot inside Heat drives rapid expansion Little mixing with ambient air

Pyroclastic Dust Clouds Concrete was pulverized before it hit the ground, as destruction progressed. Note also the dust’s explosive mushrooming upward and outward (many times the size of the tower)

Pyroclastic Dust Clouds * Fine dust suspended * Rapid expansion * Little mixing with air

Pyroclastic Dust Clouds Dust reached ground seconds after start Core “spire” still standing here, fell at 29 seconds Cloud has reached out 700’ Speed: 700/19 = 37 feet/sec = 25 mph

Expanding Dust Clouds Dust reached ground seconds after start Core “spire” still standing here, fell at 29 seconds Cloud has reached out 700’ Speed: 700/19 = 37 feet/sec = 25 mph

Destruction Above Impact Zone: WTC1 Damage line remains in place for a while while roof-top starts to descend, appears to disintegrate before the “collapse” begins.

Destruction Above Impact Zone: WTC2 Equal-time frames, angle changes from 1 to 2, not from 2 to 3, cessation of rotation violates conservation of angular momentum, unless mass is being destroyed

Early ejections Dust and debris are ejected before fall -- South tower top is only tipping

Squibs Ejections of dust far below destruction -- pressure might be distributed that far down due to pile-driver compression, but where does the dust come from, and why only in specific places?

Explosions: Witness Reports
WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Explosions: Witness Reports In NYFD oral histories, hidden by NYFD until NY Times forced release in 2005, about 120 out of 500 reported explosions

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Explosions: Witness Reports Firemen and WTC1-2 explosions

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Explosions: Witness Reports Firemen hearing it; post-WTC1-2 explosions

High Temperatures Remember: Office fires: Usually max 1100°F Iron/steel melt at about 2800°F Metallic microspheres Metal sprayed into air so surface tension can pull into near- spherical shapes Iron (2800°F), lead (3180°F), molybdenum (4500°F) Vaporized steel

High Temperatures WTC 1-2 Destruction Features
NASA heat image from several weeks after 9/11 -- temperatures in excess of 1000°F on the surface

Iron-rich Microspheres
WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Iron-rich Microspheres

Iron-rich Microspheres
WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Iron-rich Microspheres RJ Lee (2003, 2004) Studied Deutsche Bank dust contamination Iron particles: 6% of WTC dust (>> .04%) Lead oxide coated -> vaporization (3180°F) US Geological Survey (2005) WTC Particle Atlas Iron-rich spherules NIST mentions neither

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Vaporization of Steel
FEMA Report, Appendix C (WTC7) authors 1” column -> 1/2”, razor sharp, gaping holes like swiss cheese “partly evaporated at extremely high temps Thinning due to high temp (1800F) corrosion Eutectic mixture w/sulfur (lowers melting point) accelerates intergranular melting NIST ignored this In Q&A, claimed sulfur came from wallboard Never experimented, doesn’t happen

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Vaporization of Steel
From FEMA Report, Appendix C (WTC7)

WTC 1-2 Destruction Features Residues
Question: What could generate sufficient heat to melt steel? Answer: Thermite -- an incendiary mixture of iron oxide (rust) and aluminum OR Thermate -- the above combined with sulfur (lowers the melting point of iron/steel and would help explain the FEMA report’s sulfidation BUT . . .

Objection: Many: Thermite can’t cut through beams NIST: Thermite can cut through a beam, but takes a while, so it isn’t fast enough to explain the rapid collapses. Answer: In fact, existing patented technology addressed this and other NIST objections, OR Nanothermite -- thermite composed of particles on a nanometer (4 ten-millionths of an inch) scale. BUT . . .

Objection: Forget about nanothermite. All the devices for directing the thermite blast would be found in the wreckage Answer: Nothing was found in the wreckage of that sort -- no desks, cabinets, furniture -- just concrete powder and structural steel But in any case, self-destructing devices DO exist...

Objection: Well, there'd at least be miles of wiring tangled up in the debris. Answer: Actually, wireless detonators were even available that can be connected to a programmed set of detonation instructions -- leaving open the possibility of an instantly reprogrammable set of instructions to match any given situation, such as where a plane hits. . .

Objection: I still don't believe thermite is fast enough, and even if it were, you'd need TONS of it. Answer: That's why I suggested nanothermite.

Objection: There’s no such thing (in many forms!) Answer: “At Livermore Laboratory, sol-gel chemistry [hydrocarbon matrix] ... has been the key to creating energetic materials with improved, exceptional, or entirely new properties ... These new materials have structures that can be controlled on the nanometer (billionth-of-a-meter) scale ... In general, the smaller the size of the materials being combined, the better the properties of energetic materials. Since these ‘nanostructures’ are formed with particles on the nanometer scale, the performance can be improved over materials with particles the size of grains of sand or of powdered sugar. In addition, these ‘nanocomposite’ materials can be easier and much safer to make than those made with traditional methods.” -- “Nanoscale chemistry yields better explosives”, in Science and Technology Review, October, 2000, published by Lawrence Livermore Lab

from Lawrence Livermore Lab: “Nanoscale chemistry yields better explosives”

Objection: What does that article have to do with WTC? Answer: Physicist Steven Jones found metallic chips in the WTC dust: red on one side, gray on the other Their amount was not insignificant The red side consisted of nano-scale particles and flat platelets, and contains, among other things, aluminum, iron, and oxygen, in a carbon-containing matrix When heated to ~420°C, there was a sudden release of heat and production of iron-rich microspheres The analysis team pubished a paper on this in 2009 BUT . . .

Red-gray (nanothermite?) chips

Nanothermite particles?

Objection: The red layer was obviously protective paint coating (there are persuasive chemical analysis arguments to this effect) They should have heated it in the absence of air -- thermite has its own oxygen and paint doesn’t Answer: Paint doesn’t have nano-scale particles Paint does not burn hot enough to create iron-rich spheres Nils Harritt stated on the record that they obtained samples of WTC protective paint and the chemical signature was not the same.

Conclusion We know the official story is not true (this is only the tip of the iceberg) We can surmise, but don’t know, what happened The 9/11 Commission was compromised Wrong goal: how did the attacks succeed Staff head Philip Zelikow NOT independent We need a new, truly independent investigation with subpoena power NYCCAN attempting to get a NYC investigations

Appendix 1: WTC Steel Removal

WTC7 Steel Only one piece examined by FEMA (App C)
liquid iron/oxygen/sulfur eutectic moved along intergranular boundaries, weakening the beam eutectic mixture evidenced only 1000C, much lower than expected for melting steel Possibilities raised by FEMA long-term heating in the ground pre-collapse, accelerated steel weakening FEMA calls for further investigation, NIST doesn’t do it Raises the larger question of WTC steel removal

Removal of WTC Steel Not all bite-sized pieces
Indicates not total dismemberment, but confuses issue of what melted prior to collapse

Removal of WTC Steel Why is it an important issue?
Largest crime in U.S. history Law requires preservation of evidence 350,000 tons removed (acc. to FEMA) Bloomberg: looking at steel doesn’t tell anything, need computer models Yet said to be “highly sensitive”

Removal of WTC Steel Reasons given
WTC1-2: Needed to find survivors WTC7 Needed to find survivors (but evacuated) Putting pressure on Verizon building (but could have just moved that part) In any case, could have labeled, docu-mented location, and saved elsewhere

Removal of WTC Steel What happened to it?
Thousands of pieces trucked to 4 landfills Immediate result: Most sent to Asia Some used to build warship U.S.S. New York 150 pieces saved (in off-limits hangar at JFK) Only parts from underground and lobby area Who decided? Later (January 2007) found more 2 columns, 3 connected perimeter columns (under road excavated for human remains) 1 burned column at edge of site (city: was cut off)

Removal of WTC Steel What did FEMA look for?
Exterior column trees & interior core columns from 1 & 2 above the impact zone or exposed to fire and/or aircraft-impacted Badly burnt pieces from WTC 7. Connections from WTC 1, 2, and 7, such as seat connections, single shear plates, and column splices. Bolts from WTC 1, 2, and 7 that were exposed to fire, fractured, and/or that appeared undamaged. Floor trusses, including stiffeners, seats, other components. Any piece that, in the engineer's professional opinion, might be useful for evaluation. When there was any doubt about a particular piece, the piece was kept while more information was gathered. A conservative approach was taken to avoid having important pieces processed in salvage yard operations.

Removal of WTC Steel What about FEMA?
62 trips to landfills Oct-Feb No access to Ground Zero No permission to collect or store steel No subpoena power to obtain building plans (to make intelligent choices) Their observation of anomalies dropped

Removal of WTC Steel “Highly sensitive”
Nov 26: Trucks monitored by GPS Sept: alleged criminal scheme to divert steel Oct: found 250 tons of scrap in LI and NJ “Geofenced” zones, “geofenced” corridors Improved efficiency and gridlock Driver behavior monitored, checked, analyzed (1.5hr lunch -> firing) “Loads consisted of highly sensitive material”

Appendix 2: Energy: A Technical Discussion

Let’s get technical ! Was there ENOUGH ENERGY available
for NIST’s “pile driver” to cause collapse? to expand the large, fast dust clouds? to throw heavy beams fast and far?

Forces and Momentum Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC 1 Dr. Gordon Ross, June 2006

Basic idea Forces and Momentum
Previous momentum analyses treated floors as individual items hanging in space, instead of being interconnected, with forces moving and distributing through the structure below.

Compression of Steel Columns
Forces and Momentum What you need to know about . . . Compression of Steel Columns Elastic phase -- load increases to failure load, at which point column is shortened 0.2% of its length; can recover (“bounce”) Shortening phase -- failure load then shortens column, up to 3% of its length Buckling phase -- buckling points appear, much less force needed to continue Pressure wave -- moves at 4500 m/sec

What happens 1 Forces and Momentum
Top 16 stories of North Tower (as a chunk) free-falls through a “disappeared” story Hits at 8.5 m/sec At that speed, it takes sec to shorten next story by 3% (to commence buckling) .013 sec is time for force to propagate ~60m, or 16 stories down, so all these are “moving” and thus have momentum

Forces and (conserved) Momentum
What happens 2 Now 16+1 stories falling, cuts speed from 8.5 to 8 m/sec BUT The 16 stories below are also moving slightly, and their combined momentum slows the top chunk to about 5 m/sec This gives additional time for the propagation wave to involve additional floors

Forces and Momentum ... and after many detailed calculations of kinetic and potential energy, elastic and plastic strain energy, and concrete pulverization energy...

Forces and Momentum Energy Summary

But that’s an underestimate
Forces and Momentum But that’s an underestimate Initial drop -- Assumption of unimpeded drop is unrealistically favorable to continued collapse Elastic springback -- robs some kinetic energy Ejections -- mass is lost by material thrown outside the tower perimeter, and energy required to move that mass outward The “chunk” -- energy also absorbed by damage sustained by lighter columns in “chunk” Other damage -- energy needed to sever floor/column connections and destroy other structural elements and floor contents

i.e., Collapse stops after 1 floor drop
Forces and Momentum Conclusion The energy balance of the collapse moves into deficit during the plastic shortening phase of the first impacted columns showing that there would be insufficient energy available from the released potential energy of the upper section to satisfy all of the energy demands of the collision. The analysis shows that despite the assumptions made in favor of collapse continuation, vertical movement of the falling section would be arrested prior to completion of the 3% shortening phase of the impacted columns, and within 0.02 seconds after impact. i.e., Collapse stops after 1 floor drop

The North Tower's Dust Cloud: Jim Hoffman, January 2004 (v. 3.1)
2. Dust Cloud Expansion The North Tower's Dust Cloud: Analysis of Energy Requirements for the Expansion of the Dust Cloud Following the Collapse of 1 World Trade Center Jim Hoffman, January 2004 (v. 3.1)

Dust Cloud Expansion But before we get into the expansion of the dust cloud, what about all that dust?

Pulverization Energy Dust Cloud Expansion
Concrete in tower: 90,000 tons Pulverize concrete to ~2mm size: 1.5KWh/ton Energy to pulverize to 2mm: 135,000 KWh But energy to pulverize inversely proportional to sqrt of particle diameter, dust 0.06 mm (or less) Sqrt 2 = 1.4, sqrt .06 = factor of 6 So dust creation requires ~ 6x135,000=800,000 Kwh

Somewhere between 135,000 and 800,000 KWh needed FEMA’s report: Tower 1 construction stored more than 111,000 KWh potential energy So not enough energy to pulverize concrete not as fine as observed, much less distribute it in fast-moving large clouds But forget that. There’s more ....

Basic idea Dust Cloud Expansion
The amount of thermal energy needed to expand the North Tower dust cloud as observed 30 seconds after collapse is far greater than the gravitational potential energy available from the height and mass of the tower. How?

What can produce expansion?
Dust Cloud Expansion What can produce expansion? expansion of gases due to heat vaporization of liquids and solids chemical reactions resulting in a net increase in the number of gaseous phase molecules (since this last can only be due to explosives, we’ll ignore it)

Analysis steps Dust Cloud Expansion
Estimate cloud volume at given specific time before diffusion occurs Factor out mixed-in air to get volume of particles of the contents originally in tower Establish ratio of this to the original volume -- i.e., the volume of the tower? How much energy is needed to generate that ratio of expansion for different levels of gas-expansion and liquid/solid vaporization?

Dust Cloud Expansion The picture (30 seconds later) The ref points
The cylinder: Height: 200’ Radius: 800’

Parameters at 30 sec Dust Cloud Expansion
Cylinder volume: 402 million ft3 ~1/4 is buildings, so dust = 300 million ft3 assume 1/3 is mixed-in air (unlikely -- see next slide) so conservative estimate of Cloud Volume = 200 million ft3 Speed of advance observed: 25 mph

Due to mixing/diffusion?
Dust Cloud Expansion Due to mixing/diffusion? 25 mph is too fast for advance to be diffusion Outside features of cloud were relatively stable, not diffused by m/d Sinking sections replaced by clear air Reports of people being picked up and carried by “solid” wall of hot dust

Expansion in 30 sec Dust Cloud Expansion
Tower volume: 1368’ x 207’ x 207’ = 58.6 million ft3 Cloud volume: ~200 million ft3 Expansion ratio: (conservative)

1. Gas expansion by heat 1 Dust Cloud Expansion
If pressure and amount (mass) stay the same, volume is proportional to absolute temperature (PV = nRT) If start temp was room temp (300oK), 3.4 x that is 1020oK, an increase of 680o. Raising air that far requires 499,500 KWh (remember: available energy = 111,000) But it gets worse . . .

Such tiny dust particles (10-60 microns) will reach temp equilibrium with surrounding air very fast So you have to raise them 680o too The 90,000 tons of concrete dust would require > 11 million KWh And if there’s water, it gets worse, but we’ll skip that and treat water separately

2. Vaporization of water Dust Cloud Expansion
3.4 expansion means 2.4 x tower volume would be created steam: 2.4 x 58 million ft3 = 141 million ft3 = 4 billion liters Volume at 100oC: steam = 1680 x water So 2.4 million liters of water needed to produce the entire cloud volume of steam Conversion would require > 1.5 million KWh Plumbing + concrete + people: not enough

How much of which? Dust Cloud Expansion
Heating of gases: would require 780oC Ground level not that hot High heat apparent higher in cloud (next slide) Water-to-steam: requires too much water, needs additional heat to get to 100oC first If combined: steam conversion would add to the energy requirement of gas heating, additional head needed for concrete dust Reduction? Early dust settling would reduce needed heat, but cloud behavior contradicts that

High Temperatures Dust Cloud Expansion
“Digital photographs and videos show a bright afterglow with a locus near the center of the cloud, commencing around 17 seconds after the onset of the North Tower's collapse. “Once the afterglow started, the cloud developed large upwelling columns towering to over 600 feet, and the previously gray cloud appeared to glow with a reddish hue.”

Summary: Energy Sources and Requirements
Dust Cloud Expansion Summary: Energy Sources and Requirements Conservative figures

Why conservative? Dust Cloud Expansion
They are based on an estimate of dust cloud volume at a time long before the cloud stopped growing. They use a liberal estimate of the contribution of mixing to the volume (1/3). They ignore thermal losses due to radiation. They ignore the resistance to expansion due to the inertia of the suspended materials, and energy requirements to overcome it.

Conclusion Dust Cloud Expansion
The massive discrepancy between the gravitational energy available and the heat energy needed to drive the expansion of the dust cloud render the gravity explanation for the collapse of the North Tower (and similarly, the South Tower) untenable.

3. Beam Ejection

Beam Ejection Photograph by Michael Rieger taken on 09/18/2001 in New York

Beam Ejection Structure of Perimeter Columns (FEMA)

Beam Ejection Well, maybe not 600,000 lbs...
MIN near top NIST, via Gregory H. Urich * B.S. Elect/Computer Engineering MAX near bottom AVG scaled *

Beam Ejection World Financial Center 3

(NASA photo & scale from FEMA report)
Beam Ejection Distance from North Tower to World Financial Center 3 about 480 feet (NASA photo & scale from FEMA report)

Parameters Beam Ejection
Building: WFC3 American Express Horizontal distance: 480 ft / 160 m Column weight: 3.5K / 12K / 23K lbs Vertical distance (conservative): 325 m North Tower -- use top: 400 m WFC3 24th floor: 75 m Air resistance: negligible (heavy, spearlike)

Calculation Beam Ejection
fall time = sqrt (vert-distance / 1/2 gravity) = sqrt ( 325 m / 4.8 m/sec2 ) = 8.14 sec horizontal speed = horiz-distance / time = 160 m / 8.14 sec = 71.1 m/sec = mph Force to accelerate tons to 44 mph ??

Concrete Pulverization “Pyroclastic” is used to describe volcanic dust clouds Fine particles (solids suspended in air) Hot inside Heat drives rapid expansion Little mixing with ambient air