Could somebody give me evidence that friction causes molten metal?

pdoherty76

Banned
P
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
571
I keep hearing that the molten metal at wtc was caused by friction.

I have never heard of this phenomenon and if true would be very interested to see the proof of this.

This is a genuine request for info.
 
pdoherty76 said:
I keep hearing that the molten metal at wtc was caused by friction.
Click to expand...
Source?

By the way, pdoherty, you've been posting here long enough that I should NOT have had to ask that question.

Is any of this sinking in at all, pdoherty?
 
slijpen.jpg


check if this is possible but then with metal on metal...
 
pdoherty76 said:
I keep hearing that the molten metal at wtc was caused by friction.

I have never heard of this phenomenon and if true would be very interested to see the proof of this.

This is a genuine request for info.
Click to expand...

Although it is theoretically possible, I doubt that friction alone could cause molten metal, but high speed impacts, fires, and metal Oxidation reactions could, depending on the metals involved.
Friction can actually cause Aluminum and other reactive metals to Oxidize under the right conditions.
 
I keep hearing that the molten metal at wtc was caused by friction.
Click to expand...

Yes, a source would be in order. I believe, I have seen people, tell him it is possible. Not that it is certain, to have happened.
 
Last edited:
Re-entry into the atmosphere at the wrong angle, I believe will cause enough friction to make a molten goop of any satellite or spaceship that has the misfortune...am I not correct.

TAM
 
So TAM you are claiming some steel falling from a thousand feet is comparable to shuttle re-entry? Game of jenga anyone?
 
pdoherty76 said:
So TAM you are claiming some steel falling from a thousand feet is comparable to shuttle re-entry? Game of jenga anyone?
Click to expand...

Thought your main question was in general?
Could somebody give me evidence that friction causes molten metal?
I have never heard of this phenomenon and if true would be very interested to see the proof of this.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
pdoherty76 said:
gravy my source is www.debunking911.com which claims it was friction. also another thread in this forum claims it
Click to expand...
False. This page, which you were too lazy to link to, does not "claim it was friction." It raises the possibility.

Do you see the difference?

Is any of this sinking in at all, pdoherty, or are you just going to keep wasting our time like this?
 
talking of time wasting you asked me a question about alex jones in the double think post, i have answered but i get the feeling u will never reply

by the way, i am lazy, ill give u a minute to think of how that makes me anti semitic or a terrorist supporter
 
I'm big a proponent of friction. Not so much before the collapse, but after. Most of the energy that was in the tower as gravitional energy left as heat, due to friction. The only two other places the energy could go would be pulverizing concrete, which is already a very ineffecient process with lots of friction and therefore heat, and "sound".. or more precisely.. kinetic energy of the air molecules.
 
pdoherty76 said:
talking of time wasting you asked me a question about alex jones in the double think post, i have answered but i get the feeling u will never reply

by the way, i am lazy, ill give u a minute to think of how that makes me anti semitic or a terrorist supporter
Click to expand...


Ahem...wrong thread there dingo!
 
pdoherty76 said:
So TAM you are claiming some steel falling from a thousand feet is comparable to shuttle re-entry? Game of jenga anyone?
Click to expand...

What was the title of this thread and the content of the original post you made PD. I was answering this.

No, I am not saying that the friction of re-entry is the same, or even close to that created by the falling of the WTC. I do not have the scientific knowledge to make a comparison between the two, besides the amount of friction would vary with the angle of re-entry, and the friction applied to a given piece of metal in the WTC would depend on how far up it was at collapse, and how much kinetic energy was applied to it.

My purpose, was to merely show you that your question, as originally posted, was to vague. I knew what you were after, I was simply trying to show you to be more exact when asking for some info, you will get all the possibilities.

TAM
 
so in short none of you can give me a link to an academic paper that shows this phenomenon exists? yep those debunking sites are very scientific
 
An academic paper to show you that friction can melt metal? Are you serious?

They don't write academic papers to prove high school physics topics.
 
pdoherty76 said:
so in short none of you can give me a link to an academic paper that shows this phenomenon exists? yep those debunking sites are very scientific
Click to expand...
Wassamatta? Too lazy to read?

Here's what they actually say on that site YOU linked to:
One of the arguments for thermite that onspiracy theorists use is the temperature of the fire. They say the fires at the towers weren't hot enough to melt aluminum, which suggests they need an unnatural source for the melted aluminum. (Hint, hint) Yet, the aluminum outer skin of other airliners have melted without even hitting anything. Sparked only by friction...
Click to expand...
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm

The report actually shows clearly that the burning contents of an aircraft can easily be hot enough to melt aircraft-grade aluminium, i.e. metal. It goes on to show that there was easily enough energy expended in the collapse of the WTC towers to cause ignition of the buildings' contents, and thus contribute to the melting of aluminium-based materials in the rubble, such as wall partitioning, window-frame, etc (the WTC, like most modern buildings, had LOTS of aluminium inside). See above. It did not require the use of external ignition sources (like squibs or explosives). Examples are shown in the report...if you read it.
 
are you looking for a reference to a paper that states that molten metal at the WTC site was caused by friction?

I do not believe that NIST addressed the "molten metal" at the site, and I am not sure, to them, what the relevence would be in doing so. The importance of this, is only in the minds of CTers...noone else.

TAM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom