Publish to Newswire
Add an EventQuestions about the WTC North Tower collapse
The Strange Collapse of the "Spire"
An odd remnant of the core of the north tower stands briefly after the collapse, then appears to drop straight down in a column of dust
A fragment of the core of WTC-1 towers above dust clouds billowing from the collapse
The jagged triangular spire of steel columns seen above is a portion of the service core that remained standing for almost 20 seconds after the main body of the dust cloud from the north tower collapse reached the ground . It can be seen in several still pictures and at least one video, and appears to be about 3/4 the height of the building, say 75-80 floors, narrowing down to just a single column at the top. Although it appears to represent only a fraction of the entire cross-section of the core, for some reason this group of columns has not fallen with the rest. Despite the turbulent pyroclastic slurry of building debris swirling around it the spire remained unperturbed and almost motionless as the dust clouds roiled away, swaying slightly as can be seen in the videos below.
The fact that the upper portions of these particular columns, and all of many others, have shattered and fallen away at this point is difficult to explain. If the only trauma they have suffered was from the floors sliding down around the service core damage to the core columns should have been minimal. Fewer than half the core columns were along the edges of the rectangle, and only those carried the hanger brackets that supported the trusses. As the floors slid down they would have sheared bolts and welds, but it is hard to see how this interaction could have completely destroyed most of the core columns. The core was extremely robust, designed to be able to support the entire weight of the buildings several times over. Far more than mere "service cores," they comprised 47 steel box columns tied together at each floor by steel plates, similar to the 52" deep spandrel plates that tied the perimeter columns together. The largest of these core columns were 18"x36", with steel walls 4" thick near the base and tapering in thickness toward the top, and were anchored directly to the bedrock. The smallest of the core columns appear to have been bigger than the 14"x14" columns that made up the outside walls.
(note: The outer walls' primary function was to brace against wind loads, and they were not counted upon for weight bearing, though they did of course carry some weight in the resting state. By placing the support against wind loading right at the surface where the loads occur the whole structure could be lighter with the same amount of lateral stability.)
This construction picture gives a sense of how massive the core was
Pictures of the Disintegration
Beyond the mysterious shattering and disappearance of the upper ~30% of the core, there is a much more serious anomaly. The "spire" stood for about 20 seconds after the debris cloud fell away from around it, swaying slightly without tipping over despite its height and lack of support. It then began to drop straight down in place, but after dropping only a little way it abruptly turned into dust in place, very much as the towers themselves did.
Still upright, top column leaning a bit
Before and after views of the core remnant just as it turns to dust. In the first picture WTC-7 is directly in front of the spire, and the camera is above ground level. The second picture is shot from street level, and we have moved to the right relative to WTC-7.
Four Views of the WTC-1 Collapse: note how dust cloud drifts to left, away from WTC-7, leaving spire behind
Note position of the midline of the tower relative to the edge of WTC-7. The framing of the picture changes and the view pulls back to a wider angle , making WTC-7 get smaller and move a little to the right. The top of the spire that can be seen in the last picture just matches the midline of the intact tower in the first frame. But yet something else strange is happening here. If the spire corresponds with part of the core, i.e. the midline of the building, why does the towering dust cloud of the main collapse move off to the left, leaving the spire completely outside the main cloud. In fact the spire has a smaller dust cloud of its own that can be seen in the second and third frames, a remnant left behind as the axis of the collapse shifts.
Video Clips of the Disintegration
Here is a downloadable MPEG (11MB) of the spire as it appears and falls.
For those with less bandwidth this is a cropped 2MB version in animated GIF format.
The broken columns of the core can be seen emerging from the dust cloud as it reaches the ground, and incidentally at that moment the scene to the left of the dust cloud gets much brighter. The spire can be seen for about 20 seconds, swaying a little from side to side. It then starts to drop in an apparent free fall, almost perfectly straight down on itself. But after falling for about a quarter of its height it suddenly turns to dust: heavy dust that continues to drop straight down. There is very little dispersion or wind drift, suggesting that the particles are heavy. More or less what one would expect to see if the steel of the columns had turned all at once into a coarse powder.
Some Thoughts in the Face of the Impossible
What could possibly be going on here? I really wish this were an artifact, that the resolution of the images wasn't good enough to be sure. But looking at the still picture of a narrow vertical column of dust confirms the impression of the videos that the core remnant has turned to dust more or less in place. Perhaps the shockwaves of those "dust ejections" (whatever name you may apply, they look a lot like explosions) that we saw during the collapses has shattered the thinner upper portions of the columns. Might that same battering from multiple high-energy shockwaves have changed the microcrystalline grain structure of the remaining steel in such a way that they became extremely brittle? Something very unusual has happened to these particular steel beams, something that caused them to not merely topple or crumple in segments but to disintegrate in place.
The selectivity of the initial collapse that left behind this portion of the core while removing the rest is also difficult to explain. Consider how cleanly the cross-braces have been sliced off along that single column at the top, short pieces of the vertical plates welded to each of the core columns sheared off without so much as generating enough force to pull down this single unsupported column. Something very energetic has removed the rest of the building from around this slender structure with almost surgical precision, something able to release amounts of energy orders of magnitude greater than the gravitational energy of the building.
Donate
$230.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Rumor Mill News Reading Room Forum
EXPLOSIVES PUT IN WTC CONCRETE WHEN CONSTRUCTED-1
Posted By: Jedediah_Smith
Date: Tuesday, 29 October 2002, 10:43 p.m.
Agent 86 Prevents Kaos' Destruction of D.C. Government Buildings
or
How the WTC Was Really Demolished
I almost spat my morning cereal across the room at the TV. I knew all along it had explosives! But what I had just seen and heard actually told how they did it! Ever since I first saw pictures of the WTC catastrophe, it was obvious that explosives had been detonated in the collapse, similar to a controlled demolition. There were too many unanswered questions, too many "coincidences," too many inconsistencies between the evidence and "expert" opinions, and even among their own explanations. But what clinched it for me was, of all things, an episode of the 1960s television comedy "Get Smart." Before you dismiss me as insane, recall the old intelligence rule, "If you want to hide something, put it out in the open," which was never more true than in this case.
I was still half-asleep munching my breakfast, watching "Get Smart." This show was supposed to have been a "spoof" of James Bond movies, featuring Don Adams as Maxwell Smart (Agent 86), but in actuality it was closer to reality than one might think. For starters, the show was a fight between the good guys, "CONTROL," and the bad guys, "KAOS." This was a perfect portrayal of the Hegelian dialectic, the creation of a problem, i.e. Kaos, to provide the opportunity for a solution, Control. The "solution" of course is continual, creeping enslavement of the populace as our liberties are eroded.
The show also featured high-tech gadgetry as gags that sometimes didn't seem quite so laughable, if you paused to think. Even the producers of the show publicly admitted that the CIA called them and wanted to know where they were getting some of their ideas. And because "truth is stranger than fiction," when you want to introduce the truth to the public, sometimes you have to do so by mixing truth and fiction.
It is also an axiom of criminal psychology that, upon completing his crime, a criminal will be so proud of his "accomplishment" that he must brag about his feat. He will either leave clues and/or purposely tell people, because he perceives his evil behavior as being intelligent and can't keep his mouth shut.
In the case of the WTC, the criminals spilled the beans in episode 52 of "Get Smart," entitled "Smart Fit the Battle of Jericho" (whatever that means) which was initially aired on Saturday, February 18, 1967 at 8:30 P.M. on NBC. In this episode, a Kaos front, the Joshua Construction Company, is run by Kaos agent Frank Lloyd Joshua. Their buildings have a bad habit of blowing up. The Chief, head of Control, gives Smart his orders to infiltrate the company and find out how they were hiding nitroglycerine used to blow up the buildings. I was still half-asleep and had failed to grasp the episode's significance until the point where Smart infiltrates a construction site and picks up a brick, only to discover it is hollow. He then realizes that they were hiding the nitroglycerine in the hollow bricks. After seeing this, it hit me like a ton of (nitro-filled) bricks, "Of course, they blew up the WTC by putting explosives in during construction!"
Furthermore, as part of their plot, Kaos was constructing government office buildings in Washington, D.C., and waiting until the office buildings were fully occupied to detonate the explosives with all the workers inside. They were purposely underbidding all the other contractors because Kaos was subsidizing the company so that they could get the government contracts, even at a loss. A German Baron who owned an explosives company that supplied the Germans in WWI and WWIII was supplying the explosives. Joshua told Smart that all Kaos had to do was shoot a bullet at the bricks to initiate a chain reaction detonation of the explosives to bring down the whole building (a miniature version of 9/11). At the end of the episode, the Chief and Max are at the site and the Chief asks, "Where did you put the nitroglycerin?" Smart replies, "Oh, don't worry, Chief, I put it in a safe place. I put it in the cement." The workers were just mixing the cement then. I could swear that the first time I saw the episode, the show then closed with a big explosion. But the second time I saw it several months later, the show ended less dramatically, with Smart and the Chief realizing that the building would still blow up when occupied.
I'm sure when this episode aired originally in 1968, American viewers all got a big laugh out of it. Who would ever believe, a foreign-owned construction firm putting explosives inside government office buildings and blowing them up? The groundbreaking for the WTC was August 5, 1966. This episode aired only 197 days after the WTC groundbreaking. The steel construction didn't even begin until August 1968, and the ribbon cutting wasn't until April 4, 1973. This whole thing was just wayyyyyy too coincidental for me to accept.
No, it was beyond coincidental; it actually told how they did it.
I was always suspicious of the construction of the WTC, thinking that would have been a perfect time to sabotage it. It was designed by a foreigner, Minoru Yamasaki. But the closing comedic moment, when Smart puts the nitro in the cement, was a telling clue. Previously I had only considered the possibility of explosives being placed at strategic locations, but, what if they had actually mixed the explosives in the concrete used in the WTC?
According to Eagar and Musso (2001), the construction of the WTC consisted of a center core, which held up the entire structure, and an outer series of steel columns designed to laterally stabilize the WTC. The inner core and outer columns were connected by steel joists covered by concrete to form the floors. There were no bricks in which to hide explosives, however, concrete would be the perfect medium.
But, given the circumstances of the revelation of this clue, I next decided to briefly research the background of the "Get Smart" producers.
A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THE CREATORS OF "GET SMART"
It is very difficult to get much information about those involved with the creation of the "Get Smart" TV series. It turns out it was produced by a company called Talent Associates, which was formed in 1948 by David Susskind. Previous to this, he was a talent scout for MCA. According to Dr. John Coleman (1996) MCA has always been an arm of British intelligence, MI6, and the Committee of 300. Their long-term goal (stress on "long-term") has been to destroy America since our revolt in 1776. Some of their methods included exporting social change, such as British rock and roll along with drugs, free love, homosexuality, etc. Television was one of their favorite mediums, using companies like MCA and seemingly innocuous TV programs like the Ed Sullivan show, to introduce social change by pushing the envelope of acceptable behavior. This might seem laughable compared to today's TV fare, but recall that Sullivan was the first to show Elvis, and was allowed only a waist-up view. They have also attempted to disrupt our culture through "talk" shows, which is really evidenced by their vulgarity today.
In 1958 Susskind hosted a local New York talk show called "Open End." It started at 11 p.m. and would not end until all participants were exhausted. Susskind's talk shows were noted for their controversial and confrontational nature. His most notorious interview was with Soviet head Nikita Kruschev. He interviewed many famous people over his career. On October 10, 1971, Susskind established a first on American television when he hosted seven lesbians. This is a perfect example of how the Committee of 300 would destroy the social fabric of America through the public discussion of such despicable behavior. Later on March 2, 1974, Susskind again hosted gay and lesbian activists.
By the time of "Get Smart," Talent Associates consisted of Dan Melnick and Leonard Stern, in addition to founder Susskind. The story goes that it was Melnick who wanted to spoof Bond (yet another MI6 creation, designed to glorify spying for the British monarchy, etc.). The above mentioned episode 52 was written by a man named Arne Sultan. Being the writer of this episode, some aspects of his life could really provide some more clues, but he is really covered up well and I can't find out anything about him.
One is impressed by the knowledge the creators of the show had concerning certain details of intelligence, which suggests that they had inside information. For example, in one episode, various U.S. intelligence agencies try to infiltrate what they think is an enemy front organization. In a hilarious twist, it finally turns out that all the members of the "front" are actually the members of the various American agencies, and there are no legitimate or enemy employees. I have a problem believing that the average comedy writer of the 60s would have ever thought of this.
It's also interesting that Kaos is not confined to just one country, but is a conglomeration of countries such as Russia, China, etc. with their spies in the U.S., all joining forces to destroy America. While during the Cold War these countries obviously cooperated with one another against us, it was not to the extent of the situation America faces today. The scenario depicted in the TV series more closely resembles our current state of affairs, not that of the '60s. Now we face an evil, sinister force, which transcends national boundaries and has sent its terrorist agents right to the heart of our nation's capitol. Exactly what did the producers of "Get Smart" know?
Furthermore, the occasional appearance of the Admiral, who gives orders to the Chief, shows an inside knowledge of how things work. Few people even today are aware of the existence, much less the importance, of the Office of Naval Intelligence. Rayelan Allan's husband, Gunther Russbacher, was a high-ranking ONI intelligence officer and she tells of the times when Admirals used to sit around her dinner table talking about high-level government affairs. Also of interest, Rayelan says that generally the Admirals and the Navy officers are highly intelligent and against the New World Order (NWO), whereas the "Get Smart" Admiral character is a senile old man. The creators of the show seem to be poking fun at the Navy. Besides the stunning revelations of episode 52, even a cursory investigation into the background of "Get Smart" reveals that whoever created and wrote it exhibited an inside knowledge of government intelligence activities.
PROBLEMS WITH THE OFFICIAL WTC COLLAPSE EXPLANATIONS
Before I proceed with the explosives investigation, I want to touch on some problems with the official explanation, which is that the steel weakened or melted from the heat, couldn't support some of the floors, and they fell down neatly on top of one another in a domino effect. There have been many good reports refuting this on the Internet and I won't go into them in detail.
But a few things have direct relation to the theory I will discuss. Throughout this report I will quote and dissect the paper written by Eagar and Musso (2001) because Dr. Eagar is the Thomas Lord Professor of Materials Engineering and Engineering Systems at MIT, and there are some serious inconsistencies in some of his statements. MIT has a strong relationship with the government, so it is naturally going to spout the government line.
First, it seems obvious that explosives were used. The collapse looked just like a normal controlled demolition, and even Van Romero, VP for research at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology said so publicly (Uyttebrouck, 2001). Witnesses such as firefighters said they heard bombs going off inside the buildings. I think I'll go with the eyewitness testimony rather than the government propaganda.
Second, according to Eagar and Musso (2001), the building essentially fell into its own footprint. Consider the more extreme case of the second tower hit, which was way off the mark and almost missed the building. There is no way the building could have received equal heating on all sides. Therefore, the obvious, more likely scenario would have been that, if the building materials did indeed reach a melting temperature, those on the struck side of the building would have fallen first due to the greater heat of the fire. As these joists, chunks of concrete, etc. fell, they would have fallen floor upon floor only on the struck side. This would have lead to the exact opposite result of what we saw, that of an organized collapse of each floor completely around the building.
Furthermore, with all the heat concentrated on one side of the building, this would have melted the steel on that side before the other. Logically, this should have lead to a situation whereby the building would have leaned to the weaker side, and eventually fallen over onto surrounding buildings, yet this did not occur.
A third problem is that, supposedly, the angle clips supporting the outer end of the joists gave way first and allowed the floors to fall down on top of one another. OK, so why didn't the center core remaining standing, like the spindle on a phonograph player with a stack of record sitting on the turntable? In fact, both ends of the joists were supported with angle clips, so they should have fallen and left the center core relatively intact.
SOME INCONSISTENCIES IN REPORTED "FACTS"
I want to discuss briefly some "inconsistencies," to say the least, that I found in preparing this paper. In particular I want to address the opinions of Dr. Thomas Eagar of MIT, who has become one of the major apologists for the official explanation, which document the lengths to which the government will go to hide the truth.
Dr. Eagar Can't Remember How High the Rubble Is (Where Did All the Debris Go?)
Eagar and Musso (2001) state that, "In essence, the building is...about 95% air, explaining why the rubble after the collapse was only a few stories high." I was disappointed that officials from MIT would make such an inaccurate statement. In actuality, the building is 89.5% air. This can be calculated as follows:
Each building was 208' square and 1353' tall. The area of both buildings totalled 86,528 ft2. The total volume of the buildings was 117,072,384 ft3.
The total volume of concrete used was 425,000 yds3. There were 200,000 tons of steel used. I used the standard density of steel which is 8.0 kg/dm3.
200,000 tons x 907.2 kg/ton = 181,440,000 kg of steel
181,440,000 kg x dm3/8.0 kg = 22,680,000 dm3 of steel
22,680,000 dm3 x m3/1000 dm3 = 22,680 m3 of steel
22,680 m3 x yd3/0.765 m3 = 29,647.1 yds3 of steel
Therefore the total volume of the construction materials should have been approximately:
425,000 yd3 + 29,647.1 yd3 = 454,647.1 yd3
454,647.1 yd3 x 27 ft3/yd3 = 12,275,471.7 ft3
[100 - (volume of construction materials/volume of building)] x 100 = percent air
[100 - (12,275,471.7 ft3/117,072,384 ft3)] x 100 = 89.5%
An engineering professor should not be 5% off on such an easy calculation. Now we can calculate what the height of the debris pile should have been:
volume of construction materials/surface area of building [i.e. debris pile] = height of debris
12,275,471.7 ft3/86,528 ft2 = 141.9' high
This is approximately 14 stories of debris, not the "several stories" quoted by Eagar and Musso (2001). It appears that they are trying to underestimate the debris height on purpose. What are they trying to hide? Actually, this figure is a minimum for the debris height and should have been higher. Air would have been mixed with debris and there would have been voids, etc. which would have inflated the height. Furthermore, this figure is as if all the steel was melted down in a block, when in actually the outer columns were hollow and had a greater volume.
In another printed statement, an interview by NOVA, Eagar changed his story and said: "The World Trade Center collapse proved that with a 110-story building, if 95% of it's air...you're only going to have about five stories of rubble at the bottom after it falls." Dr. Eagar can't even consistently state the height of the debris pile.
Discrepancies in Steel Temperature
Two MIT professors (Buyukozturk and Ulm, 2001) said that "Some 60 tons or more of jet fuel could have easily caused sustained high temperatures of 1,500 F [816oC] and higher."
But Eagar and Musso (2001) stated that "it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750-800oC range."
Then in the very same journal issue, Barnett et al. (2001) report that: "A section of...beam retrieved from the collapsed World Trade Center Building 7 was examined...[Analysis] strongly suggests that the temperatures...approached ~1,000oC...
So even the MIT experts cannot agree on the WTC temperature. And how could a building adjacent to the WTC towers have experienced a higher temperature?
Eagar Changes His Mind About Skyscrapers Tipping Over
Bollyn writes that: "Demolition experts say that towers are the most difficult buildings to bring down in a controlled manner. A tower tends to fall like a tree, unless the direction of its fall is controlled by directional charges."
In the NOVA interview, Eagar says, "I once asked demolition experts, 'How do you get it to implode and not fall outward?' They said, 'Oh, it's really how you time and place the explosives.' I always accepted that answer, until the World Trade Center, when I thought about it myself...The correct answer is, there's no other way for them to go but down. They're too big."
I like that scientific answer: "They're too big." Would you accept this from one of your students on an exam at MIT, Dr. Eagar? Exactly what happened to make you change your mind?
What's the Temperature, Doc?
Eagar and Musso (2001) said "It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425oC..." Then in the NOVA interview, Eagar said, "You can permanently distort the beams with a temperature difference of only about 300oF [149oC]."
So what is the right temperature to affect steel? And if steel distorts at only 300oF, why aren't there more WTC-type collapses of buildings on fire?
He goes on to say in the interview, "But the steel still had plenty of strength, until it reached temperatures of 1,100oF to 1,300oF...Eventually the steel lost 80 percent of its strength, because of this fire that consumed the whole floor." Elsewhere in the interview Eagar says, "the fire covered the whole floor within a few seconds."
How could he possibly know this if the entire building was obliterated? And if it is true, then why wasn't an equal amount of smoke seen emerging from the entire perimeter of the building?
The Angle Clips Did It
Eagar also says in the interview, "But the steel still had plenty of strength, until it reached temperatures of 1,100oF to 1,300oF. In this range, the steel started losing a lot of strength...Once you started to get angle clips to fail in one area, it put extra load on other angle clips, and then it unzipped around the building on that floor in a matter of seconds."
This scenario is virtually impossible. According to Eagar and Musso (2001) the floor joists extend from the outer columns to the inner column, which bears the weight of the entire structure. The joists only serve to tie the inner and outer "tubes" together, and to support the weight of their own floor. They are supported at either end by angle clips. At these temperatures the concrete would have been burned away, leaving the exposed steel. At that point each joist supported no weight whatsoever, and the angle clips only supported the weight of the joist. If the angle clips did fail, the end result would be that the joist simply fell on the next floor. There was nothing at all to make anything become "unzipped around the building on that floor in a matter of seconds."
Nova and Eagar Tell a Baldfaced Lie
While reading the NOVA interview of Dr. Eagar, I saw something that at first glance shot holes in any explosive theory, which requires explosives in the weight-bearing inner core (and location of the stairs and elevators). The following exchange took place:
"NOVA: "Miraculously, a number of firefighters survived inside Tower One. They were on the third or fourth floor in a stairwell, and immediately after the collapse they looked up and saw blue sky above their heads--their part of the stairwell survived. How is that possible, with all the force of that 500,000-ton building coming down?"
Eagar goes on to supply some cock-and-bull explanation for this supposedly truthful event. I thought, I don't remember hearing this story, and it seems impossible. I later searched on the Internet and could find no other references to the alleged "miracle." Then I realized that it had to be a lie concocted to throw people off the trail. Since the inner core supported the buildings, it had to have explosives to drop the structures, but "survivors" there would preclude this possibility.
The following facts totally disprove this fabrication. Tower One, the North Tower and site of the supposed miracle, collapsed at 10:29 a.m., 39 minutes after the South Tower collapsed. David J. Prezant, MD, Deputy Chief Medical Officer of the Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY) is a highly credible witness who was there when the twin towers collapsed. From Zucker (2001):
"...[Dr. Prezant] described the conditions immediately following the first tower's collapse: 'The particulate matter was so thick that the sky was literally black,' adding that it was 'dark as midnight, with incredible dust, particulate matter all around me that was suffocating [and] difficult to swallow.'"
In other words, when the supposed firefighters were allegedly gazing up at the blue sky above the North WTC Tower, credible witnesses testify that the sky was "dark as midnight."
Why on earth would NOVA and Eagar spout such an outright lie, which totally destroys their credibility? Was it to draw the public's attention away from something, like the inner core perhaps? Such lies document the lengths to which the conspirators will go to obfuscate the truth.
OFFICIALS REFUSED TO HAND OVER BLUEPRINTS AND TEST STEEL
As incredible as it seems, the N.Y. Port Authority, the quasi-governmental agency in charge of the WTC, refused to hand over the blueprints to the WTC. The city impeded the investigation to the point where the cause of the collapse can likely ever be determined. From Shin (2002):
"An inquiry into exactly what caused the twin towers to collapse after they were hit...may have been undermined by the hasty recycling of steel wreckage that could hold vital clues, experts told Congress yesterday.
"About 80% of the structural steel from the World Trade Center was scrapped without being examined by even one fire expert..."
"...'The lack of significant amounts of steel for examination will make it difficult, if not impossible, to make a definitive statement as to the specific cause and chronology of the collapse,' said Glenn Corbett, a fire science expert from John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan who testified before a House Science Committee inquiry into the collapse and the ensuing investigation...
"The lead investigator in the case, Gene Corley of the American Society of Civil Engineers, said the Port Authority refused to hand over blueprints for the twin towers-crucial for evaluating the wreckage-until he signed a waiver saying his team would not use the plans in a lawsuit against the agency.
"'This is the first time I have signed something like that,' Corley said...'"
And from Lipton (2002):
"...The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating...
"None of the investigators...had subpoena power, meaning that they could not order the city to stop sending the steel off for recycling or demand a copy of the building blueprints."
SOME GENERAL UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
Now I will list some questions that have gone unanswered in my mind from the beginning. You undoubtedly have some of your own, but these are some I had that only the explosive concrete theory can answer thus far. I will attempt to explain them later in the paper.
Why did the second building that was hit end up being the first one to fall?
Why so little debris? As already proven, it should have been a lot higher than "a few stories."
Why no chunks of concrete found? Eyewitnesses and photos document that no significant-sized pieces of concrete were remaining.
Why so much dust? A normal building collapse, even with controlled explosives, does not generate such tremendous quantities of dust. Experienced witnesses said there was "incredible" amounts of dust (see description below).
Why were remains of survivors so vaporized? This should not have happened if the building simply collapsed from a fire.
What is the cause of the "WTC cough?" Doctors still have no clue as to what caused it. Dr. Prezant says, "It's a persistent cough,...a sore throat, and interestingly enough,...an accompanying GI irritation." (Zucker, 2001)
EXPLOSIVES MIXED IN CONCRETE ANSWERS ALL OF THE ABOVE
The theory of the mixing of explosives in the concrete answered every one of the above questions. Because of this, there was no doubt in my mind that the theory was correct. If explosives were simply placed in key locations by terrorists, to be detonated when the planes hit, then why did the second tower fall first? If the culprits wanted the American public to accept the lie that the planes alone caused the towers to collapse, then they would have ensured that everything was orchestrated in a consistent manner, i.e. that the first tower struck fell first, and that approximately the same amount of time elapsed between impact and collapse for each tower.
If explosives were merely placed in key locations, they would have had to have been remotely detonated through some fashion, with radio waves, satellites, etc. They wouldn't have left things to chance and hoped that the planes hit the exact place needed and detonated properly.
For the same reason, disinformation on the Internet that some type of electromagnetic space weapon was used to vaporize the towers could not have been the case. Otherwise they would have destroyed the buildings in the proper sequence.
The greatly reduced pile of rubble is explained if the explosives were mixed in with the concrete. This would have reduced the concrete to dust and/or vapor, spread for blocks around and into the atmosphere, and explains the tremendous quantity of dust and lack of significant pieces of concrete. Most of the debris left would be chunks of steel.
Also, the sparse human remains that were found is explained by explosives mixed in the concrete, which would have vaporized humans when exploded. Normal cremation temperatures range from 1400-2100oF (760-1149oC), requires about 2 hours, and still leaves 4-8 pounds of bone fragments and particles. Blast temperatures of the propagation wave can range from 3,000 to 7,000oC (Atlas Powder Co., 1987), which would explain the lack of human remains. None of these would be explained by the theory that explosives were placed in key locations and detonated.
The "WTC cough" provided some of the strongest evidence that explosives were placed in the concrete. No medical or health professionals could figure out what was causing this condition. Speculation ranged from biowarfare materials the terrorists either had on the plane or placed in the building beforehand (and if so, why not explosives?) to asbestos and other contaminants. Obviously, there was a wide spectrum of dangerous materials mixed in the dust from building materials such as asbestos, burning furniture and upholstery, etc. But I knew there was one hazardous material which would have been present in overwhelming quantities compared to these toxins.
Concrete is produced by the following steps: limestone, or calcium carbonate (CaCO3), is mined from a quarry. The limestone is heated up to approximately 900oC to convert the limestone to quicklime, or calcium oxide (CaO). The formula is as follows:
900oC
CaCO3 => CaO + CO2
The quicklime is used to make cement, to which you add water when you are ready to mix and pour the cement. The mixture produces slaked lime or calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2]. The formula is as follows:
CaO + H2O => Ca(OH)2
This mixture becomes hard as the water dries and the slaked lime reacts with atmospheric CO2. This partially returns the mixture back to the original CaCO3 through the following reaction:
Ca(OH)2 + CO2 => CaCO3 + H2O
The above reaction is incomplete and over time, as the concrete structure sets, it is continually absorbing atmospheric CO2 so that more of the material is converting back to CaCO3. The Romans invented concrete, which is merely the addition of stones and/or other materials to the cement for strength. They also added volcanic ash to produce a very strong pozzolan cement. This is because the ash contains silicates (based on SiO2) that react with slaked lime to produce a hydrated gel called tobermorite. Portland cement is formed by adding aluminum silicates (Al2O3 2SiO2), e.g. clay.
I don't know exactly what type of cement was used in the concrete mixture of the WTC (and it is doubtful one could find out the real mixture, anyway) but since calcium carbonate (CaCO3) is the primary constituent of concrete, we'll confine our examination to that for now. Bear in mind that additives to make concrete such as stone would probably be silicates and would not significantly alter our conclusions. Suppose for the sake of argument that either the building collapsed according to the generally accepted theory or from strategically-located bombs. This would have produced quantities of calcium carbonate dust from the concrete. But the materials safety data sheet lists no major health hazards for calcium carbonate, other than as a simple mechanical irritant.
The extremely important point about calcium carbonate is that it can be converted back to calcium oxide when exposed to temperatures of 900oC, reversing the reaction discussed above. And calcium oxide is an very hazardous material which causes symptoms exactly like the "WTC cough." Calcium oxide is an extremely caustic substance because of its high alkalinity; this is why you should always wear gloves when mixing cement. The symptoms of calcium oxide exposure are as follows (from a materials safety data sheet):
"Inhalation:
"Inhalation of dust is highly irritating and possibly corrosive to the upper respiratory tract. May cause coughing, sneezing, labored breathing, and possibly burns with perforation of the nasal septum.
"Ingestion:
"Corrosive. May attack the esophagus. Abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting may result. May cause serious alkali burns in mouth and throat.
"Skin Contact:
"Irritant; may cause severe corrosive damage.
"Eye Contact
"Severe irritant, may damage eye tissues. Causes redness, tearing, blurred vision, pain."
Compare the above with the following quotes from the a paper produced by Mt. Sinai Hospital (Szeinuk et al. 2002):
"Since the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, there has been concern about the impact of environmental contaminants generated by the fires and building collapses on the health of workers at and near the site as well as of residents of the surrounding communities and workers returning to work at or near the site. Potential environmental exposures related to the WTC disaster include: cement and glass dust, asbestos, fiberglass, PM2.5 and PM10 (small particulate matter), larger particulate matter, lead and other heavy metals, PCBs, dibenzoflurans, volatile organic compounds and other products of combustion. While concern has been primarily about inhalational exposures, there have been a number of reports of dermal irritation and rashes on exposed areas of the skin. In addition, those escaping the area on September 11th and those working without appropriate respiratory [equipment] early after the disaster, experienced ingestional exposures. Primary short-term health effects of exposure to airborne contaminants may include asthma/reactive airways disease (RADS), chemical irritation of the eyes, nasal passages, throat, and upper airways, sinusitis, and persistent cough, and pneumonitis. Additionally, ingestional exposures may result in digestive symptoms such as irritation of the upper gastrointestinal tract with gastro-esophageal reflux (GERD)...
"In general, measured levels of exposure to individual airborne contaminants have been relatively low....
"Conditions that have been seen in adults who have been at or near the site for as little as 24 to 36 hours, include...RADS, sinusitis, irritant rhinitis, persistent cough, and diffuse irritation of nasal mucosal surfaces. There has also been an increase in GERD symptoms, especially among first-responders or individuals who where (sic) hit by the cloud of dust and debris released from the collapse of the towers...Given the extremely high temperatures of the fires...combined with the tremendous range of contents...it is likely that we will never fully know the precise nature of exposures..."
Although the above lengthy paper acknowledged that many toxic chemicals were produced by the high heat of the fire burning materials present, there was absolutely no mention of calcium oxide. This should have been one of the most obvious because it was undoubtedly one of the most prevalent compounds. Another paper sheds some more light on the symptoms (from Zucker, 2001):
"'The World Trade Center fire probably represents the single greatest exposure in recent history to respirable particulates in an urban environment,' David J. Prezant, MD, Deputy Chief Medical Officer of the Fire Department of the City of New York (FDNY) told Pulmonary Reviews. Dr. Prezant, who is also a pulmonologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City, was present when the twin towers collapsed.
"...[He] described the conditions immediately following the first tower's collapse: 'The particulate matter was so thick that the sky was literally black,' adding that it was 'dark as midnight, with incredible dust, particulate matter all around me that was suffocating [and] difficult to swallow.' He stressed 'That's what people were inhaling during the first hours after the collapse.'
"Dr. Prezant's patients nicknamed the most prevalent effect on firefighters and paramedics the 'WTC cough': 'It's a persistent cough,...a sore throat, and interestingly enough,...an accompanying GI irritation,' he said. The reflux-like symptoms, which may worsen cough, might have been triggered by swallowed particulates, Dr. Prezant speculated. Roughly two thirds of the group had a dry cough and some degree of GI irritation. Most cough symptoms arose within the first week after exposure, and they were the most severe at the end of week 1 through week 2, said Dr. Prezant...
"Relative to the very real risk presented by particulate matter, there has been an 'inordinate amount of attention' given by the media to exposure to airborne toxic substances, such as heavy metals, asbestos, and silica, Dr. Prezant argued. Preliminary results showed no elevations in the levels of these substances in the vicinity of Ground Zero, he added..."
Dr. Prezant notes that there is an unusual presence of gastrointestinal irritation, and argues that swallowed particulate matter may be the cause. This is an exact symptom of calcium oxide poisoning because of its caustic nature. Yet no doctors have mentioned the formation of vast quantities of this material in the catastrophe. This is even more unfathomable when one considers that this chemical reaction is on the warnings of the materials safety data sheet for calcium carbonate which reads:
"Hazardous Decomposition or By-Products: When heated at temperatures above 900oC (1652oF) carbon dioxide is liberated thereby forming calcium oxide."
The media has instead focused on other materials which have been documented not to have been in sufficient quantities to explain this condition.
CALCIUM OXIDE PRODUCTION EXPLAINS WTC COUGH AND LACK OF DEBRIS
The conversion of concrete (CaCO3) into vast quantities of calcium oxide (CaO) dust perfectly explains the prevalent "WTC cough" and the lack of debris. The conversion of the entire buildings' concrete would require temperatures of 900oC throughout the buildings. This could only have occured if explosives were mixed into the concrete during construction. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, blast temperatures in the propagation wave (i.e. inside the concrete) can reach temperatures of ranging from 1649-3871oC [3,000 to 7,000oF] (Atlas Powder Co., 1987). The boiling point of calcium oxide is 2850oC (5162oF), well below the temperatures of the propagation wave. This means that the victims of WTC cough were probably not only breathing calcium oxide dust, but vapor as well. Imagine pouring lye on your skin, which causes a burn and leaves a permanent scar. This is what the calcium oxide would have done to the victims' lungs, leaving permanent scarring. The vapor would have been worse than the dust, immediately intruding into the entire lung like air, and scarring it completely.
The government's official explanation, of the towers collapsing from weight, would not have generated sufficient heat to convert concrete to calcium oxide. Even Eagar and Musso (2001) admit that "it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750-800oC range." Maybe this explains why no doctors have thought of calcium oxide formation, because they have swallowed the official theory. It is also doubtful that strategically-located explosives would have produced such heat, because this does not happen during normal controlled demolition of buildings.
The production of calcium oxide from calcium carbonate would cause a drastic reduction in volume of material due to the release of carbon dioxide gas. We can estimate the volume produced, percent reduction and calculate how high the debris should be.
We must first calculate the weight of the concrete. We need to know the density to do this. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) specifies a maximum density of 1,840 kg/m3 for structural lightweight concrete in Chapter 2 of ACI 318 "Standard Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete" and also defined in the "Guide for Structural Lightweight Concrete" prepared by ACI Committee 213.
One thing to consider is that the steel skeleton, not the concrete, was load-bearing (besides the concrete floors bearing the weight of their contents), thus the density could have been less than this maximum. Eagar and Musso (2001) state, "Prior to the World Trade Center...most tall buildings contained huge columns...and contained massive amounts of masonry carrying some of the structural load. The WTC was primarily a lightweight steel structure..."
From previous information we were told that 425,000 yd3 of concrete were used:
425,000 yd3 x 0.765 m3/yd3 = 325,125 m3
325,125 m3 x 1,840 kg/m3 = 598,230,000 kg of concrete
Let's assume, for ease in calculations, that the concrete in the WTC was pure CaCO3. It was an old structure and CO2 had been absorbed over time, increasing the conversion of Ca(OH)2 into CaCO3, as discussed previously. There were obviously other additives for strength, such as stone, but we are trying to keep the calculations simple. If we had to, we could refine our calculations if we knew the materials and proportions mixed in the original concrete, but that information is probably unattainable, and at any rate, unnecessary. We also need to use the chemical concept of a mole, which is defined as the amount of an element or substance that contains the same number of atoms as exactly 12 g of 12C, which has been determined experimentally to be 6.022 x 1023. This number is named Avogadro's number after its discoverer. One mole of a substance equals the sum of its molecular weights (derived from a periodic table of the elements), which can be expressed in grams. Thus one mole of CaCO3 equals:
40.08 (MW for calcium) + 12.01115 (MW for carbon) + 3[15.9994 (MW for oxygen)] = 100.08935 grams
From the above, we take the weight of the concrete and calculate how many moles of CaCO3 would have been present prior to the blast:
598,230,000 kg x 1000 g/kg x mole/100.08935 g = 5,976,959,587 moles CaCO3
900oC
From our equation CaCO3 => CaO + CO2:
one mole of CaCO3 = one mole of CaO + one mole of CO2
Therefore, when the 5,976,959,587 moles of CaCO3 were heated in the intense explosion of the WTC collapse, assuming a 100% conversion rate, they produced 5,976,959,587 moles of CaO, along with 5,976,959,587 moles of CO2 released into the atmosphere. We can now calculate the weight of the calcium oxide produced. One mole of CaO equals:
40.08 (MW for calcium) + 15.9994 (MW for oxygen) = 56.0794 grams
therefore,
5,976,959,587 moles CaO x 56.0794 g/mole x kg/1000 g = 335,184,307.5 kg CaO
This represents a reduction in weight of 335,184,307.5 kg/598,230,000 kg = 56%
of original concrete volume.
In other words, the weight of the WTC concrete was reduced almost by half, which helps explain why the debris pile was so small. We can now calculate the volume of CaO. Calcium oxide has a specific gravity of 3.37, which is relative to water with a specific gravity of 1.00 g/cm3. Changing this ratio into more meaningful terms for our tremendous quantities:
3.37 g/cm3 x kg/1000 g x 1,000,000 cm3/m3 = 3370 kg/m3
Therefore the volume of calcium oxide produced equals:
335,184,307.5 kg x m3/3370 kg = 99,461.2 m3
As we well know there was a tremendous quantity of airborne dust produced by the collapse, but let's suppose that the entire volume of this was piled up in a square shape over the site of the buildings. We can now calculate how high the pile would be:
Dimensions of each building equals:
63.40 m (208') x 63.40 m (208') = 4019.6 m2
Total building area = 2 x 4019.6 m2 = 8039.1 m2
Total height of dust pile = 99,461.2 m3/8039.1 m2 = 12.4 m or 40.4' high
From above we calculated a volume of 22,680 m3 of steel. Calculating this additional height:
22,680 m3 = 2.8 m or 9.2' additional height.
The total height would be 40.4' + 9.2' = 49.6' or almost 5 stories. Thus, the total height of the debris pile would have been almost a third of the 141.9' minimum height which one would have predicted had the WTC merely collapsed according to the official explanation. This compares more favorably with the "several stories" of debris quoted by Eagar and Musso (2001) and we still have further reductions in volume to consider.
Rumor Mill News Reading Room Forum
EXPLOSIVES PUT IN WTC CONCRETE WHEN CONSTRUCTED-2
Posted By: Jedediah_Smith
Date: Tuesday, 29 October 2002, 10:48 p.m.
In Response To: EXPLOSIVES PUT IN WTC CONCRETE WHEN CONSTRUCTED-1 (Jedediah_Smith)
OTHER LOSSES OF CONCRETE VOLUME
The above figure would in actuality have been greatly reduced because there would have been other losses of calcium oxide. As previously mentioned, the blast temperatures of the propagation wave through the concrete would have greatly exceeded the boiling point of calcium oxide. This would have immediately vaporized large quantities of calcium oxide directly into the atmosphere, not into dust which would have slowly returned to the ground surface.
The vapor density of calcium oxide is 1.9, i.e. calcium oxide is 1.9 times as dense as air. This means that if calcium oxide dust was widely dispersed as occurred during the WTC collapse, it would be almost twice as dense as air and would very slowly return to the ground. This vapor density figure is somewhat misleading because at higher temperatures the vapor density will drop, as would have been the case during the collapse. We could calculate a more accurate figure for a given temperature but there is no available data for the vapor pressure of calcium oxide. Regardless, both eyewitness testimony and video footage show that perhaps the majority of the dust was dispersed into the surrounding environment in thick clouds that lingered for hours.
The unknown quantity of explosives in the concrete would have obviously disappeared into the atmosphere upon detonation. While we can only guess, for reasons that shall be discussed shortly, this could have been 25% or more. It is obvious from lack of concrete debris shown in photos of the site after the tragedy that most of the "concrete" simply vanished. The mixing of explosives into the concrete is the theory that best explains the observed results thus far.
POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE THEORY OF EXPLOSIVES IN CONCRETE
As stated above, the "Get Smart" clue concerned nitroglycerin in cement. If this is indeed what happened at the WTC, there were several problems that must be overcome. As the show's ending portrayed, how would one mix the cement without exploding the mixture? How would the final product resist accidental detonation while the building was in use? And how would the explosive chemically co-exist with the concrete?
In actuality, while liquid nitroglycerin is notoriously unstable, explosives can be designed for a wide range of conditions and uses. Nitroglycerin is usually the minor component, having given way to nitroglycol with its lower freezing point. But these are too expensive and outdated. There is a much more feasible possibility that would have solved all the above problems: emulsion explosives. In the early 1950s a coal operator began mixing ammonium nitrate and small amounts of carbon to load into his blast holes. The practice caught on and soon diesel fuel replaced the carbon black. This technique quickly captured 50% of the blast market (Atlas Powder Company, 1987).
In 1968 an explosives manufacturer, whose name I will not mention, introduced emulsion explosions to the commercial the market. [I am by no means implying that this manufacturer had anything to do with the WTC catastrophe, because their ideas and techniques could have been copied. But interestingly, this company has family ties to imprisoned CIA agent Michael Riconosiuto, a genius with numerous inventions, among them the fuel-air bomb.] At this time, other companies were selling water gel slurries as blasting agents, but this required chemical sensitizers. This company discovered that with entrapped air mixed in, the inexpensive ammonium nitrate could be mixed with a water/oil emulsion to produce an extremely efficient explosive. At first they used air bubbles, and then used glass microspheres containing microscopic air bubbles. The bubbles can be entrapped inside glass, plastic, resin or other materials. This material acts a bulking agent and the concentration can be varied to control the sensitivity of the blast material, i.e. more bulking agent will be harder to detonate. The microbubbles can withstand a pressure of 5 atmospheres and would easily remain intact inside concrete.
The addition of materials with microbubbles serves to add oxygen during the explosion. A silicate material such as glass would be similar to that added to Portland cement to increase strength. This would be the perfect addition to concrete as it would increase, not decrease the strength of the end product, while greatly increasing its explosive potential. Remember that the concrete did not bear much of a load and strength was not even an important factor.
Ammonium nitrate is colorless which would match perfectly in concrete. However, it will attack concrete chemically so this problem would have to be addressed. During the manufacturing of blasting grade ammonium nitrate, the small particles (prills) are coated with clay (a silicate) to keep them from sticking together. The outer clay layer would be compatible with the concrete and prevent an adverse chemical reaction. Too much clay reduces explosive potential. It may be that the density of the prills would have to be adjusted during manufacturing to withstand the pressures of mixing, however increasing density reduces efficiency. Blasting grade prills are less dense than agricultural grade, although both are explosive.
In emulsion explosives these particles are soaked in diesel fuel which makes them waterproof. They are 5.7% diesel fuel by volume and would only have to be waterproof until the concrete is dry. Emulsions are extremely efficient, with over 90% efficiency and almost twice that of some water gels. They have a high velocity of detonation (VOD, more on this later). Their power is due to the microscopic particle size. Any type of material will burn more efficiently as the particle size decreases-this is why the dust in grain elevators can sometimes explode, and this is the theory behind the extremely powerful fuel-air bomb. A 5% addition of finely ground aluminum powder can also be added to emulsions to greatly increase their explosive power, though VOD decreases.
Emulsion explosives are pumped into blasting holes from large trucks that look like regular construction-type vehicles such as dump trucks or concrete trucks. The slurry could easily have been pumped into the concrete mixture onsite at the WTC (in unmarked or disguised trucks) and no one would have noticed. Another possibility is that the dry components were mixed in with the dry cement offsite and then this was mixed with the water onsite in the preparation of the concrete.
Tests have shown that emulsions will not detonate even when shot with a .30-06 bullet. A specially-designed gun for testing detonation, using a 15 mm projectile weighing 19 g, showed that the velocity had to reach 2000-2500 fps (610-762 m/s) before detonation of the emulsions would occur (Larsson and Henricksson, 1980). This would equal a minimum kinetic energy of:
19 g x kg/1000 g x (610 m/s)2/2 = 3535.0 kg-m2/s2 [joules]
If the emulsion was mixed into the concrete, this stability would have been more than enough to withstand any pressures that might have normally been exerted against the concrete floor in the WTC.
I don't know the length of the rifle barrel used in the experiment, but assuming one meter length for our purposes (probably a little long), we can calculate the minimum pressure required to detonate the charge and compare that to the pressure of the falling floors. The acceleration of the bullet equals:
[(610 m/s)2 - 02]/2 x 1 m = 186,050 m/s2 (0 = original velocity of bullet)
Radius of bullet = 15 mm/2 = 7.5 mm
Area of bullet cross section = pi(7.5 mm)2 = 176.71 mm2
176.71 mm2 x m2/(106 mm)2 = 1.7671 x 10-4 m2
Force of bullet = 19 g x kg/1000 g x 186,050 m/s2 = 3534.95 newtons
Pressure of the bullet striking the explosive = 3534.95 n/1.7671 x 10-4 m2 =
20,004,244 Pascals
Now we can get some idea of how much pressure would be exerted from the falling floors, to see if that would be adequate to detonate the explosives. According to Eagar and Musso (2001), the ten floors that came crashing down in the north tower weighed 45,000 tons. The tower hit bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km/hr. Even though the ten floors wouldn't have been moving at this velocity initially, we'll use these figures, anyway.
45,000 t x 1000 kg/t = 45,000,000 kg
45,000,000 kg x 9.8 m/s2 [gravity] = 441,000,000 n
Each floor had about one acre (4020 m2) of rentable space:
441,000,000 n/4020 m2 = 109,701.5 Pa
This means that the pressure exerted by the crashing down of the floors was only 1/2 of one percent of the minimum detonation pressure and could not possibly have detonated the explosives in the concrete floors. This means that heat from the fire must have been responsible for the initial detonation. This would explain why the terrorists needed massive quantities of fuel, to generate enough heat for detonation.
What If the WTC Had a Normal Fire?
Another potential problem of having explosives mixed in concrete would be if the WTC sustained a normal fire. If the explosives were too sensitive they would explode from the heat. It would then be hard to explain to the public how an office building blew up in a fire. This is not really a problem, however.
We need to first distinguish between the terms temperature and heat. Heat refers to the quantity of energy produced in a system, i.e. it is related to a volume, whereas temperature simply provides a standard numerical measure of molecular agitation at one point in space. Temperature is totally independent of quantity.
An office building such as the WTC only has mildly flammable materials such as paper, furniture, computers, etc. which cannot generate as much heat as, for example, a warehouse storing flammable chemicals. A normal fire in an office building or residence does not produce high temperatures or heat. Furthermore, the WTC had an extensive sprinkler system which, even if it did not extinguish a fire, would have lowered its heat production.
Concrete acts as a heat sink, which means that it does not hold heat well. This can be observed during cold weather in a heated house with a concrete floor-it will feel colder than the air temperature. This characteristic ensures that during a normal fire in a building, the concrete will conduct the heat to the surrounding, cooler areas. Therefore it takes a large quantity of fuel, such as occurred in the WTC tragedy, to rapidly generate the significant amounts of heat necessary to drastically raise the temperature of concrete.
Some explosives can tolerate a surprisingly high amount of heat before exploding. A burning test is conducted on all commercial explosive products to ensure quality control and provide safety data (Atlas Powder Company, 1987). The test consists of placing samples of the various types of explosives in a wood or diesel fire, in confined and unconfined states. The explosives, depending on the type, can tolerate the fire from 30 minutes to 6 hours.
According to Eagar and Musso (2001): "In combustion science, there are three basic types of flames, namely, a jet burner, a pre-mixed flame, and a diffuse flame...In a diffuse flame, the fuel and oxidant...flow together in an uncontrolled manner...A fireplace flame is a diffuse flame burning in air, as was the WTC fire."
Therefore, by the above definition, a fire in the WTC and the burning test of explosives are classified as the same combustion condition, i.e. that of a diffuse flame. Since some explosives can withstand this type of combustion for up to six hours, it should have been no trouble to design a concrete explosive which would not detonate under the conditions of a normal fire, should one occur in the WTC. This also explains the time lag between the initial plane impacts and the final collapses, since some explosives take so long to detonate under heat.
INTERIOR CORE PROBABLY HAD EXPLOSIVES ALSO
"Inside [each tower] there was a 27 m x 40 m core, which was designed to support the weight of the tower" (Eagar and Musso, 2001). This interior core was the optimum location for placement of explosives to simply cause the buildings to collapse. In actual fact, the design specified placing concrete around all the steel in the building simply to delay the heating of the steel in a fire, which was projected to give firefighters another 1-2 hours in which to fight a fire (BBC News, 9/13/01). This is because, as previously discussed, concrete acts a heat sink and heat would flow through the concrete away from the fire. This would actually have delayed the steel-melting scenario proposed by the government.
The high-speed elevator shafts had a flexible drywall system installed to prevent buckling of the mortar from the high air pressure inside the shafts. This would have been the perfect medium in which to place explosives. However, according to one account, it was not initially placed in the building but was installed when the original mortar cracked from the elevator air pressure. Explosives in the center core were likely in the concrete just as in the floors. Explosives in the central core of the building would be highly confined compared to that in the floors, with the surrounding open office space. This would lead to optimum detonation and power (see below).
VELOCITY OF DETONATION (VOD)
As previously mentioned, the emulsion explosives have a high VOD (also known as having a high brisance). This is preferable when the desired object is hard, like rock or concrete, because it causes the material to fracture, but the material is not thrown far. A slower VOD is more useful in throwing large quantities of soil, such as blowing an area out for mining, pond construction, etc. The material is thrown further with less damage. This high brisance would have been desirable for the WTC because it would have shattered the concrete but allowed the building to fall basically in its own footprint.
BLASTING THEORY, SHOCK AND STRESS WAVE PROPAGATION
There are a variety of theories of how a blast is accomplished, but the following are some generally accepted principles. The detonation wave starts at the point of initiation and travels at supersonic speeds, ranging from 8,000 to 26,000 ft/sec. This depends on explosive density, confinement, etc. This is analogous to, say, shooting a rifle cartridge where the powder is confined, as opposed to pouring the powder out of the cartridge and lighting it, where it will harmlessly burn. The mixing of explosives in concrete would be very confining and could be ideal, given the optimum density of explosives.
Pressures in the detonation wave can range from 9 to 275 kbar. Once the wave is initiated the explosives in a blast hole will be detonated as the wave is propagated through the material. One bar = 100,000 Pa, so this means a pressure is created ranging from 9 x 108 to 2.75 x 1010 Pa. Recall from our above calculations that the minimum pressure required to detonate emulsions was about 2 x 107 Pa. This means that at a minimum, the blast wave is 45 times stronger than the detonation pressure required. The skeletal steel structure of the entire building was connected through its covering of concrete, thus one can see that once the detonation of the explosives was initiated in the concrete, the pressure wave would have detonated the entire structure.
Also, as previously discussed, temperatures in the detonation wave range from approximately 3000 to 7000o F. which would have helped propagate the detonation as well.
Let's imagine the following: the plane strikes the tower, the fuel ignites, burns for a time and reaches a detonation temperature for the explosives in the concrete. The wave would have been propagated like this rough representation of the offcenter south tower hit (the hollow center is the central core with the lateral floors extending outward-the limitations of the Internet prevent a better depiction):
core
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- -----
| / / | outer columns
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- -----
| / / |
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- ----- floors
| / /
-----<----<----|<<<| initiation arrows show horizontal
| / of << direction of
-----<----<----|<<<| detonation blast wave
| \
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- -----
| \ \ | / represents ascending
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- ----- blast wave
| \ \ |
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- ----- \ represents descending
| \ \ | blast wave
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- -----
| \ \ |
-----<----<----|<<<|---- ---- -----
Note here that the detonation wave would have last reached the bottom level on the side of the building opposite the planes' point of impact.
If the VOD was 15,000 fps, and the detonation was initiated at the top of the building, to reach the bottom it would take:
1353 ft x 1 sec/15,000 ft = 0.090 sec
If cameras were filming at 24 frames/sec, and could see the structure through the walls, the propagation wave would only be caught on 2 frames. But because the inside of the building could not be seen, this minimized the visible signature of an explosion. The hot gases will always seek the path of least resistance. The spaces between the floors would have provided a space to vent some of the hot gases formed by the explosives, which means that there would be less hot gas to visibly escape from the windows. On some of the videos of the collapse of the towers, I saw a few appearances of bright flame which may have been from the explosion. It would be interesting to know what type of glass fragments, if any, were found in the debris. If real glass was used in the windows, which melts at ~1371oC (2500oF), it may have been vaporized by the heat, or turned to dust just like the concrete.
A COVER STORY FOR MIXING EXPLOSIVES
It would not have been particularly hard to secretly mix explosives in with the concrete during WTC construction, but supposing that there might have been a few engineers that found out, a cover story would have to be invented. Since nothing lasts forever, and the valuable real estate of WTC site was cramped and surrounded by other buildings, it would have been difficult to one day conduct a controlled demolition on the site without damaging the other buildings. As mentioned above, a tower is the most difficult type of building to bring down because it tends to fall like a tree (Bollyn, 2001). Therefore, any engineers who were "in the loop" could have been told that the explosives were necessary to make it easier to bring the building down later. But placing explosives in the concrete floors would serve the main purpose of "vaporizing" them to create a damaging psychological effect upon the American population.
WHY THE SECOND TOWER HIT WAS THE FIRST TO FALL
I believe that the second tower, which sustained an offcenter hit after the first, actually experienced more heat because more surface area of the building was opened up. One can see the right wing tip barely extending out of the right side of the building. Since the wingspan of the 767 plane is 156', and assuming for the purposes of comparison that the plane passed through the building intact, this means that 156' + 156' + 208' = 520 linear feet of the outside of the building was opened up. Because the wingspan was greater than one-half the building side length, the gash had to extend from the crucial inner core to the building perimeter.
The direct hit on the first building, however, does not appear to have gone through the entire building. No smoke is seen exiting the opposite side of the building. Furthermore, the plane could not have gone all the way through without s
And I tend to agree that it could have been justified as a very secret self-destruct mechanism intended to be used only at the end of the normal life cycle of the building, if any one were to find out. Who knows, maybe that really was the legitimate purpose of some misguided engineer who innocently incorporated it, unlikely as that may seem. But given that there was a controlled demolition there had to have been planning on a large scale over a significant period of time, not inconceivably since before the towers were built.
Explosive aggregate in cement would be very hard to detonate, which is obviously important. The cement matrix acts much like the damper rods in a reactor to absorb shock waves and keep them from propagating. High explosives in general are hard to detonate, and burning will not usually set them off. What is needed is the shock wave from another high explosive such as a blasting cap or prima cord, say for example in a bore hole near the middle of the floor.
A good friend who is retired from the Army Corps of Engineers has looked at the pictures and videos and is fairly sure that the explosive was mixed with the concrete. He has done a lot of building and demolition, and immediately thought that the collapses were controlled demolitions. But because of the complete conversion of the concrete to dust and the odd way the perimeter columns were chopped into 1-floor lengths, he is now convinced it had to be exploding concrete. It's also the simplest explanation for the undeniable and horrible fact that the contents of the building were also turned to dust - extremely intense flat-sheet blast waves confined by the steel floor pans would do exactly that.
Some good pictures of chopped-up columns and such here:
http://home.attbi.com/~jmking/Collapse_update.htm
See my home page for updates:
http://home.attbi.com/~jmking
And apropos Get Smart, something about a more recent warning (boast?) about what was to be done:
http://home.attbi.com/~jmking/lone_gunmen/lone_gunmen_episode_1.htm