As I said before... I don't think Bush would've grand standed at ground zero if there were a nuke there.

Thermite yes, nuke no.

The theory behind "bunker busters" is that they are not using fission (uranium/plutonuim), but fusion (deuterium/tritium), which is scalable.

Which is what it says on that Finnish website, quote:

"The thermonuclear bomb used was a 'pure' hydrogen bomb, so no uranium or plutonium at all. The basic nuclear reaction is Deuterium + Tritium > Alpha + n. The ignition of this is the fine part, either with a powerful beam array or antimatter (a very certain way to get the necessary effect of directed energy in order not to level the adjacent blocks of high-rise buildings, as well)."

link: http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier2.htm

So maybe there is very little or no detectable levels of radioactive fallout from these.

I believe the Towers were brought down by hydogen bombs.

Actually I believe Wile E. Coyote planted the dynamite.

He able to fool the security guards by telling them he was only looking for the Roadrunner.

Which is what it says on that Finnish website, quote:

"The thermonuclear bomb used was a 'pure' hydrogen bomb, so no uranium or plutonium at all. The basic nuclear reaction is Deuterium + Tritium > Alpha + n. The ignition of this is the fine part, either with a powerful beam array or antimatter (a very certain way to get the necessary effect of directed energy in order not to level the adjacent blocks of high-rise buildings, as well)."

link: http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier2.htm

So maybe there is very little or no detectable levels of radioactive fallout from these.

Correct. I did not want to wade in on this, because I rather doubt the towers were brought down by H Bombs. It adds a big complication, and doesn’t seem to be needed.

However, just to get some of the physics right: If this were done, it would be a fusion device (H - Bomb) not a fission device (A - Bomb.) Back in the day we always thought of fission bombs as relatively small--from 10s of kilotons to 100s of kilotons. We thought of fusion bombs as huge--multi Megaton.

That has changed. Remember the Neutron bomb. The program was ended by Carter then re-started by Reagan. The Neutron bomb is a small H Bomb with a special shield. Fusion bombs release a flash of Helium nuclei (Alpha particles) and energetic Neutrons. The special shielding increased the Neutrons so that lots of people could be killed, but there would be very little physical damage other than right at the explosion. Remove the shielding and you get an intense burst of heat and lots of alpha particles, and absolutely no residual ratiation. None . You could show up with a giger counter five minutes later and it would show nothing.

There is only one problem. H Bombs were always triggered with fission triggers, usually plutonium. This would leave lots of residual radiation. Apparently H Bombs (fusion bombs) can now be triggered without fission triggers. How are they triggered now? I don't know. I have three friends who are physicists. Next time I see one of them I will ask. I haven't found the answer with web searches, and it is beyond my poorly remember physics (BS physics -- 1973).

I still think the H Bomb theory highly unlikely. It would have to be very small and shaped perfectly, and as I said I don't think it would be needed. Buildings are brought down with controlled demolitions and micro H bombs add what I think is a huge and unnecessary complication.

However, there is one itchy-scratchy. Why was there molten aluminum for days at the site. This is particularly bothersome since it is obvious that the jet fuel did not heat things much.

Here is an exercise for the energetic. I started this earlier, but got tired--so if you are interested, you find and perform the calculations. When an object falls, it accelerates, and gains kinetic energy. When it is stopped through friction, the kinetic energy is converted into heat. Would this be enough to heat ,say aluminum, hot enough to become molten. My intuition says no, but anyone with the energy can figure it out.

I'll start: KE = 1/2 mv^2, where m is mass (not weight) and v is velocity. Assume free acceleration (32 ft/sec/sec) Make lots of assumptions; all you want is an answer close enough to decide if it is even feasible that the fall ending with a sudden deceleration would heat the metal to molten. After you calculate the KE, find the equations to calculate the increase in heat through friction (the ground) over say 1 second from that velocity. Does 1 second sound reasonable? Nah! make it 1/2 second. That will make the heat calculation greater. Then figure out how to actually calculate a temperature--this is the hardest part. If no one has completed the exercise by May 2008, I'll do it.

Enkidu

Correct.

I was only parroting what it said on the website. It seemed reasonable, so...

I'll start: KE = 1/2 mv^2, where m is mass (not weight) and v is velocity. Assume free acceleration (32 ft/sec/sec) Make lots of assumptions]

OK, I'll get cracking (no pun intended).

Better yet, why don't you just ask one of those physicists. To them, it should only be, like, an extra-credit homework assignment or somethin'.

 

Correct. I did not want to wade in on this, because I rather doubt the towers were brought down by H Bombs. It adds a big complication, and doesn’t seem to be needed.

However, just to get some of the physics right: If this were done, it would be a fusion device (H - Bomb) not a fission device (A - Bomb.) Back in the day we always thought of fission bombs as relatively small--from 10s of kilotons to 100s of kilotons. We thought of fusion bombs as huge--multi Megaton.

That has changed. Remember the Neutron bomb. The program was ended by Carter then re-started by Reagan. The Neutron bomb is a small H Bomb with a special shield. Fusion bombs release a flash of Helium nuclei (Alpha particles) and energetic Neutrons. The special shielding increased the Neutrons so that lots of people could be killed, but there would be very little physical damage other than right at the explosion. Remove the shielding and you get an intense burst of heat and lots of alpha particles, and absolutely no residual ratiation. None . You could show up with a giger counter five minutes later and it would show nothing.

There is only one problem. H Bombs were always triggered with fission triggers, usually plutonium. This would leave lots of residual radiation. Apparently H Bombs (fusion bombs) can now be triggered without fission triggers. How are they triggered now? I don't know. I have three friends who are physicists. Next time I see one of them I will ask. I haven't found the answer with web searches, and it is beyond my poorly remember physics (BS physics -- 1973).

I still think the H Bomb theory highly unlikely. It would have to be very small and shaped perfectly, and as I said I don't think it would be needed. Buildings are brought down with controlled demolitions and micro H bombs add what I think is a huge and unnecessary complication.

However, there is one itchy-scratchy. Why was there molten aluminum for days at the site. This is particularly bothersome since it is obvious that the jet fuel did not heat things much.

Here is an exercise for the energetic. I started this earlier, but got tired--so if you are interested, you find and perform the calculations. When an object falls, it accelerates, and gains kinetic energy. When it is stopped through friction, the kinetic energy is converted into heat. Would this be enough to heat ,say aluminum, hot enough to become molten. My intuition says no, but anyone with the energy can figure it out.

I'll start: KE = 1/2 mv^2, where m is mass (not weight) and v is velocity. Assume free acceleration (32 ft/sec/sec) Make lots of assumptions]I thought Professor Jones said it was molten iron -- the residual after the alloy elements in the steel had vaporized away. He showed a picture of a now cold slag of what he thought, due to apparent rust, was residual iron. Steel melts and vaporizes at a much higher temperature than aluminum, does it not?

 

I thought Professor Jones said it was molten iron -- the residual after the alloy elements in the steel had vaporized away. He showed a picture of a now cold slag of what he thought, due to apparent rust, was residual iron. Steel melts and vaporizes at a much higher temperature than aluminum, does it not?

Could be, I'm picking bits and pieces from many web sites. If it were molten iron, it is even more curious. The book figures are aluminum melts at 1200 deg F, pure iron at 2000 deg F. I'll admit there some very curious things about WTC beyond the normal topics. Since I am not one of the all-knowing antis here, I am not too bothered to admit that until there is a real investigation we will be mostly speculating. (always worth doing) That is a far cry from the supernaturally induced magic faith that is required to believe in the governments "9-11 fairy tail."

Enkidu

This is possibly the greatest picture of all time.

This is possibly the greatest picture of all time.

...

Holy shite!! I don't think I have ever seen this picture. Do you know which tower this is? Looking at this I could just about believe any thing, including nukes. Thanks for posting it. I'm copying it into iPhoto.

Enkidu

Looks like the second tower collapse, which I believe was the north tower.

Second building is WTC7, which SATANIC KIKE LARRY SILVERSTEIN, who bought the trade center a few weeks before 911, fucks up and admits to demolishing!

He says, we decided to.. "pull it."

Those are concrete floors turned instantly into FINE dust.

Don't think "nukes" as in hiroshima.

There are smaller nuclear weapons....

They are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Holy shite!! I don't think I have ever seen this picture. Do you know which tower this is? Looking at this I could just about believe any thing, including nukes. Thanks for posting it. I'm copying it into iPhoto.

Enkidu

Holy shit! I think maybe you need to go back on your anti-psychotic medications.

Fissle and Hate Dept. , can we have an ip check on these to see if they are the same jew?