Gage and Szamboti to speak at New Jersey Institute of Technology

Dave Rogers said:

(b) there was no evidence of any core columns having got any hotter than 250C, ...

Click to expand...

We do know that every column which failed in axial overload was hot enough to fail.

Tony Szamboti said:

Good catch. I'll give you that one. It is like a double negative and wasn't my intent.

It should have said

The lack of sophistication behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is incredible or The sophistication level behind the claims of those adhering to a natural collapse scenario here is frighteningly low.

It doesn't actually say you are dumb, just that your claims lack sophistication.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a funny thing how reality isn't as interesting as well written fiction.

Tony Szamboti said:

Things are a little more nuanced than your simple words here explain.

First, a jolt will occur anytime there is an impact and that has to happen in a natural collapse and can happen in a controlled demolition, if impulsive load is depended on to continue the collapse. It can even lead to arrest in either situation if there is not enough momentum to continue it, such as what was seen in the video.

The only time there can be a no jolt situation in a collapse is where the structural integrity is continuously removed artificially.

Click to expand...

1. You wouldn't see any Jolt anyway as it would have happened inside the building at the core.

2. There is no physical evidence for explosives. If a insider type conspiracy had been hatched they would not have used CD type explosives because of the resulting and obvious evidence.

3. If progressive collapse is not possible without observing a jolt, which is a ridiculous fallacy anyway, presumably by your own reckoning there would need to be exactly timed detonations all the way down the building. This would have created a very distinct series of sounds and flashes not to mention the logistics and equipment required for the timing of such a CD while keeping it secret.

4. From what I have read so far you're hypothesis is flawed in its very nature. Couple that with the lack of evidence for a CD: missing flash bangs, missing physical evidence of explosives being used like wires required to time ignition to ALL explosives and collapse initiations starting where plane impacts were in both buildings,

jaydeehess said:

Actually there will be a 'jolt' unless all floors are demolished simultaneously. If block A starts moving and when it just about reaches block B, the columns holding block B are severed, the B is moving slower than A therefore transfer of momentum from A to B and thus , technically, a 'jolt'.

Click to expand...

Sorry, this is a bit late as I'm catching up.
However, what I can't quite understand whats happening in TZ head in that surely the column would have to be removed, not just severed? I's like he is implying that large lengths of the columns were turned into dust, or maybe ejected!? I can't quite visualize how you would "remove" all the columns using explosives. I would think to be able to "remove" them to prevent any Jolt, not just cut them, would require a huge explosion down the whole length of the building.

BadBoy said:

Sorry, this is a bit late as I'm catching up.
However, what I can't quite understand whats happening in TZ head in that surely the column would have to be removed, not just severed? I's like he is implying that large lengths of the columns were turned into dust, or maybe ejected!? I can't quite visualize how you would "remove" all the columns using explosives. I would think to be able to "remove" them to prevent any Jolt, not just cut them, would require a huge explosion down the whole length of the building.

Click to expand...

That was one obvious big error of Missing Jolt from the outset.

IF the Szamboti "falling to impact with columns aligned" scenario is accepted - it is the basis of MJ - THEN if you only cut sections out of the columns the jolt occurs as soon as the gap of the missing bit has been traversed.

I raised the issue a few times in the early days of MJ discussion/rebuttal. I was surprised when very few debunkers attached any significance to the issue. So I gave up referencing it. The "horses and proximity of water" problem is not limited to truthers.

BadBoy said:

Sorry, this is a bit late as I'm catching up.
However, what I can't quite understand whats happening in TZ head in that surely the column would have to be removed, not just severed? I's like he is implying that large lengths of the columns were turned into dust, or maybe ejected!? I can't quite visualize how you would "remove" all the columns using explosives. I would think to be able to "remove" them to prevent any Jolt, not just cut them, would require a huge explosion down the whole length of the building.

Click to expand...

The first story may have needed columns cut in the core, but after that is falling just removing joints works to eliminate structural integrity.

Additionally, to take down the Twin Towers it wouldn't be necessary to be artificially removing structural integrity all the way down the building, as at some point the falling debris is enough to cause overload. Something like ten to twenty stories would work and after that the collapse would be self-propagating.

That cannot happen early on. It is the initiation and beginning of the collapse of the North Tower, where the roofline is observable and the descent can be measured, that the lack of deceleration is significant and proves the structural integrity was being artificially removed.

Tony Szamboti said:

The first story may have needed columns cut in the core, but after that is falling just removing joints works to eliminate structural integrity.

Additionally, to take down the Twin Towers it wouldn't be necessary to be artificially removing structural integrity all the way down the building, as at some point the falling debris is enough to cause overload. Something like ten to twenty stories would work and after that the collapse would be self-propagating.

That cannot happen early on. It is the initiation and beginning of the collapse of the North Tower, where the roofline is observable and the descent can be measured, that the lack of deceleration is significant and proves the structural integrity was being artificially removed.

Click to expand...

BS. Anyone can do fantasy engineering, doesn't mean anything though, when the physics
Of the event shows your wrong!

Tony Szamboti said:

The first story may have needed columns cut in the core, but after that is falling just removing joints works to eliminate structural integrity.

Additionally, to take down the Twin Towers it wouldn't be necessary to be artificially removing structural integrity all the way down the building, as at some point the falling debris is enough to cause overload. Something like ten to twenty stories would work and after that the collapse would be self-propagating.

That cannot happen early on. It is the initiation and beginning of the collapse of the North Tower, where the roofline is observable and the descent can be measured, that the lack of deceleration is significant and proves the structural integrity was being artificially removed.

Click to expand...

As usual, Tony, you're answering a different question to the one that was asked. I think BadBoy wanted to know what was your scenario for a fire and impact damage induced collapse that resulted in the sudden disappearance of a fixed length of every support column, rather than more detailed exposition of your explosive fantasies. Can you please explain in detail how, in a collapse induced by fire and impact damage, this section of the structure could abruptly disappear? I'd be interested in your explanation of how every disappearing section could be precisely the same length too, but apparently you've arbitrarily decided that anything else is impossible on the basis of some law of physics that you just made up.

Dave

Tony Szamboti said:

... to take down the Twin Towers it wouldn't be necessary to be artificially removing structural integrity all the way down the building, as at some point the falling debris is enough to cause overload. Something like ten to twenty stories would work and after that the collapse would be self-propagating. ...

Click to expand...

Why do you think that 12 or 28 floors (the initial amount of falling debris) wouldn't be enough to overload the structure, but adding ten to twenty would? Or are you implying that even the initial top "block" might be enough to self-propagate the total collapse, but there would have to be a jolt?

Then the Missing Jolt is actually the only argument left?

Tony Szamboti said:

Oystein, explosive use in controlled demolition generally shatters the steel with a hypersonic shockwave of gas which in reality is a very high pressure which produces a high gas velocity. RDX produces a pressure of about 3 million psi against the steel and has a propagation velocity of about 27,000 ft/sec., which is about 18,000 mph.

Click to expand...

All correct - and these orders of magnitude for pressure and velocity are necessary to shatter the steel - isn't that right?

Now those expulsions - are they showing something at 3 million psi or 18,000 mph? Obviously not, right?

Tony Szamboti said:

The reason I say demolition devices is that some might try to say explosives have to be things like RDX and that isn't true.

Click to expand...

So we agree - there is no evidence for high explosives like RDX in those expulsions.

I am certain that you are most keenly aware of the total lack of any other evidence for high explosives like RDX anywhere in the WTC case.

So high explosives like RDX are out.

Tony Szamboti said:

There are composite charges that could have done the job. Nano-thermite would produce high heat and fairly high pressure to do the job, while RDX would use extremely high pressure alone.

Click to expand...

See my signature.
Heat transfer is slower than explosive pressure propagation by orders of magnitudes, so you must be proposing that there first was a thermite charge applying heat, and then, a considerable time later (enough for the heat to travel through the thickness of the steel and raise temperature VERY significantly) a second charge doing pressure work. Do I get that right? Now those two charges must be insulated from each other, or else the heat charge would kill the explosive charge prematurely.

Tony Szamboti said:

The blowouts at the spandrel connections could easily be from a composite charge.

Click to expand...

No.

Tony Szamboti said:

The use of a form of thermite would have caused molten metal in the rubble of the three collapsed buildings.

Click to expand...

No. Nonsense. Again, thermodynamics is your worst enemy!
There was no fiery molten iron in the dust and rubble cloud that descended as the towers collapsed - we would have seen the white-hot glow.

However, granting for the sake of argument that perhaps there were tons upon tons of molten iron produced in the secondes leading up the collapse and during the collapse: These tons upon tons would have quickly mixed with thousands of tons upon thousands of tons of all the rest of the dust, debris and structural remains, and the molten iron would have cooled down to solid within seconds, and lost most of its temperature within less than an hour. It's simple heat flow. Mix a spoon of hot coffee with a mug of cold milk to get the idea!


Doesn't it occur to you that all these ideas are hot, crazy fantasies?


Besides: There is no evidence for thermite. Harrit et al are a fraud.

Tony Szamboti said:

...
There is information on the Internet about composites if you are interested. Here are a couple of links http://www2.cnrs.fr/en/1926.htm and https://books.google.com/books?id=s...LTAC#v=onepage&q=composite explosives&f=false

Click to expand...

Thanks.
You simply threw two google results at me without actually reading carefully what you recommend, right?
The first merely describes a new method to mix and combine known ingredients - Al and copper oxide nanopowders. The resulting "composite" is simply - thermite! While the process results in properties closer to "ideal" nanothermite than other, previous methods, it's still merely thermite, with its limited heat and gas output. This material is NOT the kind of "composite" you fantasize about in your hot dreams - a combination of a "heat" effect with a separate (and differently timed!) "pressure" effect.

The second link is rather unspecific - a book about everything explosive. Can you be more specific about which chapter deals with the sort of composite charges you dream about?

Tony Szamboti said:

Something else you should know is that the velocity of an explosive decays as a function of the square of the distance.

Click to expand...

I know.
And that constitutes a big problem for you: Explosive CD charges - those that exert an extreme pressure wave (shockwave) onto the steel you want to shatter, must be in practically immediate contact with the steel. Let's say, center of mass of the charge no more than 1/2 inch or so away. If you first heat the steel with a thermitic heat-charge, that heat charge needs to be in contact with the steel, first. You can't do it with a 50 µm thin layer, as you well know. You remove the explosive component - and that increases its required size by the power of 2.

Also, tell this function of the square of the distance to people who claim that dustified floor slabs and people torn to small pieces were caused by CD charges. Where were those CD-charges - on the steel and away from the people and almost all of the concrete, or on the people and concrete and thus away from the steel?


So many contradictions - these fantasies can't work out, and indeed they don't work out: No Truther has ever proposed a consistent theory that explains all the gross observations of the day.

Oystein said:

All correct - and these orders of magnitude for pressure and velocity are necessary to shatter the steel - isn't that right?

Click to expand...

Wrong Oystein, the detonation waves of the explosives-sound waves act on copper, causing
Molecular degradation of the electron bonding and stripping the electrons from the copper
Atoms creating a rapidly expanding plasma.
Not a gas, the plasma and generated sound waves rebounding in the plasma, dislocate the crystals causing ductile deformation of the now heated metal, do to intergrandular sonic heating from the energy propagating though the steel.
There is no shattering of the steel. That lowers the shrapnel produced, and lowers the amount of explosives needed.

A large non directed charge would have cause considerably more damage with evidence of exstream shrapnel production.

Now Tony is talking of a non directional, charge that occurs lower than the speed of
Sound in steel, that type of charge can not possibility do anything to the steel it falsified itself,
Because the steel would absorb it and retransmit it as sound.

There is only one way that a thermite charge can be remotely planted and cut steel efficiency,
and that can never happen in a building on fire.

Tony's Ideas are a slap in the face of modern physics, not possible even remotely in this universe.

He is talking Magic, witch craft nonsense.

I am still waiting for Tony to tell us how the Ace Elevator guys placed their charges on ALL the core column of the 98th floor... most of which were not adjacent to elevator shafts.

Urrrr - CC, but I am still right, and not wrong, that supersonic velocity (shockwave) and extremely high pressure, as results so much better from a shockwave, are necessary to crack the steel - whatever the precise mechanism on the atom scale?

Tony Szamboti said:

The first story may have needed columns cut in the core, but after that is falling just removing joints works to eliminate structural integrity.

Click to expand...

Do you mean in the core of the "building designed to withstand plane impacts"? How many columns are required to be cut, and how loud would be the simultaneous explosions?

Think about it.

Oystein said:

Urrrr - CC, but I am still right, and not wrong, that supersonic velocity (shockwave) and extremely high pressure, as results so much better from a shockwave, are necessary to crack the steel - whatever the precise mechanism on the atom scale?

Click to expand...

Correct the shock wave has to exceed 5800 meters per second the speed of sound in steel to cause the steel Crystalline structure to deform, there is no confirmation of said shock waves on any recording device anywhere so they did not could not have occured.

Also all carbon based components of a composite charge will burn off in the fires before a detonation wave could have damaged the steel.

Only one way to do it and that is indicated in the device patent that Jones presented years ago, just Truther can not understand how it worked and neither could Jones.

It was a thermite device attached to an O2 oxygen Cylinder, I saw one being used on a rail road bridge hear locally.

It was attached with a standard hose to a small bottle of O2.

That was back in 2004.

Additionally, to take down the Twin Towers it wouldn't be necessary to be artificially removing structural integrity all the way down the building, as at some point the falling debris is enough to cause overload. Something like ten to twenty stories would work and after that the collapse would be self-propagating.

Click to expand...

Oh FSM's sake Tony that's exactly what happened. Grow up.

Tony Szamboti said:

The first story may have needed columns cut in the core, but after that is falling just removing joints works to eliminate structural integrity.

Additionally, to take down the Twin Towers it wouldn't be necessary to be artificially removing structural integrity all the way down the building, as at some point the falling debris is enough to cause overload. Something like ten to twenty stories would work and after that the collapse would be self-propagating.

Click to expand...

Tony,

Can you compare your explanation above to David Chandler's explanation regarding how the gravity collapse SHOULD have looked? According to Chandler, an upper section containing X amount of floors can only destroy the same amount of floors below before the energy is used up.

Here is a video containing Chandler's explanation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3keULhBlQc

Chandler says the following at 1:56.

Both sections are going to be... um... demolished at the same rate. So by the time you've crushed up 15 stories below it, the top 15 stories are also going to be crushed. So there is nothing left now to crush the rest of the building.

Click to expand...

You are saying that if 10 floors below the upper section are removed via demolition, the upper section (consisting of 12 floors) would be enough to destroy the remaining 88 floors below? Aren't you contradicting what Chandler believes should have happened? Wouldn't applying Chandler's explanation above to your scenario above result in a total of only 12 floors being destroyed, leaving 76 floors worth of tower left?

Tony,

From your paper, "The Missing Jolt":

To repeat: if RB-12+ had fallen as a rigid block, there would be impact, and the impact would
have caused abrupt interference with the fall of its upper part, including the roof. No such
interruption has occurred, and therefore no such impact has taken place. Evidently, the violent
destruction that occurred--presumably through planted explosives or other means of demolition--
effectively destroyed the structural integrity of the lower part of the upper block as well as DS-6,
permitting the upper block to fall at speed while meeting minimal resistance and experiencing
neither major impact nor abrupt deceleration.

Click to expand...

Can you please explain how you think explosives or other means of demolition would have created the characteristics seen during the collapse? How did demolition destroy the structural integrity of DS-6 and a lower portion of the upper block, yet maintain a roofline acceleration of 64% of g? Shouldn't the roofline acceleration have been at g and not 64% of it?

Tony Szamboti said:

No, one has to speak about the details of what makes a situation chaotic or uniform and orderly.

Your comments about chaotic involves your opinion that column ends would be uneven and I say that type of collapse occurring naturally, as you want to believe, would take much more time to occur. With demolition devices the columns can be cut at the same level and maintain an even, ordered, and rapid horizontally propagating collapse, such as what is observed. The instantaneousness of the charge is not the consideration and hence why I say your understanding of the subject is skewed.

Click to expand...

But Tony, we would need to see this happening to all floors (or however many you seem to think are required to continue the collapse) on all corners, not just a one off event.