Ok short Question ... NO NEED TO READ OUT THE FOLLOWING. Ok OK?!! longer version ... was there magnesium in the alloy construction of the building & plane? (We covered the small Titanium parts - blades - which were not enough to cause a Titanium metal fire of any kind of significance). I am maybe looking at this trivially, but shaved or shredded magnesium is highly flammable & can reach 3,100°C, it is also used an igniter for Thermite (Thermite = Iron & Aluminium?, was Iron & Aluminium also included in the building construction & plane materials? What is steel made from?). Magnesium is fairly inert / safe in bulk solid format... but if smashed to smitherines with the impact force of that kind of collision, would it cause all the parts & components of the plane to obliterate into a chaotic moving debris field of many different materials as it travelled through the towers gathering with it all the internals of the building that is around the impact area into the mix. Trying to look at 9/11 towers coming down with a thought towards what kind of materials & chemicals etc would be present in the impact & subsequent fires, and how they may have affected how the building ultimately came down... maybe help with thinking towards the "nanoThermite" theorists * I know its not real, but they still have claims of seeing molten metal streams pouring out, and saying it is thermite or molten steel, which many say the fires wouldnt have burned hot enough = the old "jet fuel can not melt steel" thing, but with other things to consider like Titanium & Magnesium metals that are widely used in construction & aircraft, and have capability of burning at much higher than the melting point of steel if ignited or pulverised... and would burn for days, adding water (water pipes up there yes?) Would only increase the volatility of a metal fire such as described & could even have it give off Hydrogen gases from the ignited metals, which is another fuel source itself to feed into the fire which would have the fire fuelling itself more with the fumes it gives off. my work is transformative in nature as a criticism so some usage of the original is required but uses no more of the original than is necessary & this has no negative affect on the market for the original work its self & my work is protected speech as outlined by the 1st amendment to the united states constitution & falls under fair use as outlined in united states copyright laws
0 Comments