Damocles, do gaseous explosions, like thermobarics, have a low frequency footprint?
Probably, the answer depends on the material and form of the container(s) holding the ingredients.


If I fill a strong plastic garbage bag with a mix of Acetylene gas and oxygen gas from a official gas supplier (to cut steel and iron), close it with a tie rip, with a slow burning LONG lunt-cord inside, and detonate it, you will hear quite an impressive low frequency detonation, which you will feel more in your stomach than hear in your ears, when you situate yourself at some distance.

Disclaimer : don't do this in your neighbourhood at New Years eve, the windows of your or your neighbours houses will break, when a big bag is used.
Do it in an open field, and use a LONG cord, or else.....
Gas can leak very easily and ignite premature....

A more sophisticated example can be made from a plastic container, with a firecracker glued gas-tight inside the container-lid, with its lunt sticking outside through a tiny hole drilled in the lid. Fill the gases mixture in, and close the lid. Etc....

Be damn careful, these homemade devices are much more powerful than you would expect. Especially using thick-walled containers, or even tin-plate ones.

delete


[edit on 20-12-2007 by albie]

im not going to bother quoting much cuz you know what you typed and im simply too lazy right now.

ok, the slowest "high explosives" i have data for detonate at approximatly 8000fps and is fairly weak (RE factor of .42) and the strongest detonate at over 26000fps (re factor of 1.34)

so, the speed of the detonation is going to determine the frequency of the sound to a degree. (think guitar strings. thin ones vibrate faster and have a higher frequency, conversly the thicker ones vibrate slower and have a lower frequency) anything with a low enough frequency to go undetected is simply not going to have the power to do the job.

in the first video of your second post they again discuss the magnitudes of the seizmic events and say they register right at 2 on the scale yet based on what the seizmologist is on record as saying, blasts from the same distance away that register between 1 and 2 are caused by 80,000lbs of explosives going off. most quarries use anfo so the more efficient equivilant to that is C4 which would take 25000lbs.

so, even something with an RE factor of 50 would STILL require 672 lbs and would release the same energy. so no matter how you read that, if 672lbs of something would register as a 1-2 magnitude on their scales, its going to be VERY loud becuase its releasing that same energy much faster.

im not in college anymore so i dont have access to a chem professor, so if anyone wants to ask one if its possible to even make even in theory something chemical based thats 50 times stronger than tnt. imagine the military implications. you could start putting more bombs on a bomber becuase you only need 1/50th of the ordinance for the same job.

but, after all of this we're back to my opening post. for the size of the seizmic event you'd need 12.5tons of C4 and theres just no way possible in this dimension that it happened.

so, i really admire all of the work youve put into your research and i still think you make several valid points insofar as the time discrepancies and the fall times. but, those initial seizmic events werent caused by explosives. i know that you didnt start that particular theory, but the guys at 911eyewitness are wrong.

also consider this, IF it was some far out there exotic explosive that caused ultra low frequencies, wouldnt the length of the initial spike be longer? thats a totally hypothetical question but youve made me think outside the box.

now about the second video in your second post. if you watch the left margin of the building and see the first jet of debris you will notice something. it starts, and then keeps jetting material. explosives wont do this. any jets like that caused by explosives would be initiated by the pressure wave of the explosive and drop off instantly becuase the pressure wave is over almost as soon as it starts. if anyone wants to contend that the HE overpressurized the whole floor and the increased pressure in the room did it, then i would contend that to overpressure a square acre 8' tall with enough pressure to do that, it wouldnt be so covert. you can hear the last charges going off in other CD's after the building starts to fall so how'd they have enough to pressureize (and im really not sure how you would overpressureize a room for more than an instant anyway but im trying to think outside the box...) a large area without the sound carrying out even over the sounds of the collapse im not sure. but thats one area i wont stand on as fact. i wasnt there so i dont know exactly how loud the collaspe was...but even using my model of 172lbs/floor id bet 100usd that you'd hear it. (and 172lbs is NOT enough to pressureize a room enough to make a continuous jet "squib")

so, IMO we're back to where i started in my OP and if anything im more sure of my thesis. i like to try to stand by the "anything is possible" (without being gullable of course) but i cant see how the seizmic spikes recorded at the initiation of collapse was explosives. the evidence just doesnt support it once you plug actual numbers into it

[edit on 21-12-2007 by Damocles]

[edit on 21-12-2007 by Damocles]

[edit on 21-12-2007 by Damocles]

ok, read the thermobarics thread and followed a lot of the links, (great thread by the way. lot of interesting reading) but not all. im getting ready to crash for the night. BUT i did see the diagrams about the TB vs HE in confined space and the overpressure graphs.

so, using your graphs as a basis i would like to point out a few things.

the first is that if you noticed the initial over pressure spike is LARGER for a standard HE. based on your graph would you agree with that?
if so then you have to realize that while it takes 12.5tons of c4 to register a 1-2 on the richter 17miles away (or so) then you would need a proportionally LARGER explosion from a TB to get the same seizmic data. (i couldnt say with certainty HOW much larger as i dont have any RE factors at the moment for a TB and it would also vary depending on what material they used for the airborne portion of it)

next is that a TB explosion has a longer period of underpressure so what you should see from the "squibs" is that instead of a constant under pressure jet of material, you get a jet and you should see at least SOME of it sucked back in (not likley from the ones preceding the collapse wave but certainly from the ones lower down)

last, and this goes true for any CD theory (except thermite but lets not even go there, id have to gouge out my eyes) you would HAVE to see/hear the first explosion in the seconds before you see the collapse initiate. becuase even though you see something before you hear it, you may be watching, you'd see it start to fall then hear it, you'd still hear the blast first becuase the sounds of the collapse are not going to overtake the sound waves of the blast and drown them out. its not like an indy car passing a geo metro on the highway.

so, while i still admire the work youve put in, i havnt found anything anywhere that would suggest im wrong when i say that the observed evidence doesnt support the presense of any type of preplaced explosive device be it conventional HE OR TB device.

now, i havnt listened to the podcasts yet, wife is asleep so i keep my volume off but just from all of the times ive read wilies testimony, (and it has seemed to change, does he address that in the podcasts?) i still have a few lingering questions and they are illustrated in the following quote:

Originally posted by LaBTop
I hope you to listen to these two pod-casts, and pay attention to the 7 seconds difference, according to William Rodriguez, between the first huge explosion in the BASEMENTS, and the actual IMPACT and JET-FUEL EXPLOSION FAR ABOVE of the plane.

7 seconds. not 5? not 90? not 2? does everyone look at their watch when they hear a loud noise or explosion? it just seems to be very specific. being a paranoid sort i almost feel its TOO specific but thats just a gut reaction.

In those 7 seconds he and many others saw a coloured guy from Nicaragua who used to fill the vending machines, come running into the lobby, with his skin hanging off his hands and arms to his shoulders, and half of the skin hanging off his left face, SCREAMING : Explosion, explosion.

so, JUST so that i understand what youre saying. in 7 seconds there was an explosion BELOW HIM and a man came from there up to the lobby and started screaming explosion, and THEN the plane hit. do i have that right?

so, guy below the floor willie is on, is in an explosion, has time to gather his wits and go upstairs by whatever means (stairs? elevator?) in 7 seconds? while he's injured to the point he's got chunks of skin hanging off his body? yeah, i know shock can do a lot to a person but if anything id expect him to be moving pretty slow after that.

someone PLEASE tell me that im not the only one who reads that and is left scratching his head..

Originally posted by LaBTop
BTW, Willie Rodriguez is on the no-flying, first interrogate, list of Homeland Security.
Any more totally idiotic politicians in the USA able of coming up with this kind of decisions?

lol i just had to add...i seemed to be on that list for a while. i couldnt get on a plane without being "randomly" selected for "extra screening"

(gee a demo/wmd expert who's got a current suit with the govt and is disgruntled needing extra security screening? imagine that lol)

Well, I'll wait for you to wake up, and then wait until you have heard the whole 1.5 hour interview with William Rodriguez.
There you will definitely find all the answers to your Rodriguez questions from above last post of yours.

In the mean time I will study a bit more the arguments you have offered.

For me, the only left problem is to explain to myself, what kind of source caused that huge seismic disturbance, before the global collapse of WTC 7 commenced.

In the case of accepting a human hand in this, we must also assume these hands wanted to be unseen through the whole demolition process.

So they will have planned for a hidden programming of the collapse process, but as I said before, it seems that WTC 7 had to go in concert with WTC 1, but somehow this misfired, and it kept standing, with a relatively small corner gash where we have pictures of, and some unseen and unclear damage elsewhere.
Not much to lean on for the official explainers, neither for us, the disbelievers of a lot of their explanations.
In that case they had to quickly improvise, and go by the contingency plan B.
Which must have been placement of quite destructive charges, which would have had a very low audible footprint.

That's why I keep looking for help with finding methods of destruction, which fit the low frequency footprint, and if possible also all 3 collapse video footage.

I have thought about that fairly new expansion-demolition powder, which if filled into a boxed-off type of steel column, and then whetted, will expand with such a tremendous force, that it will spread the column or beam open like a tulip.
That stuff is totally soundless, except the shearing noises of the metal.

I have also thought about some kind of huge oscillating device, hidden in the basements, which could create an intensive oscillation of the main columns, and causing the bolds and welds to break.
Since I don't know yet of such a device, it lands in the SF corner, for now.

Then I have really done my best to come up with a reasonable explanation of the sulfurized steel beams found from WTC 7 or WTC 1 and 2.
Some kind of acidification of the inside of H and I beams perhaps, or a very caustic gas filling, or whatever else we can come up with.

Both planes seemed to have impacting floors with acid filled rows of emergency power batteries. If we may believe the source of that info.

But for all this, there must have been a means of regulating those processes, in such a way as we have video proof of.
That's not easy.
But since I have proved that huge pre-running seismic energy packet for all 3 collapses, I still must find a solution for my problem.

Originally posted by LaBTop
Damocles, why are we still bickering about calculations using HE data from your era and your allowed experience (there will be other He's, FAE and TBE's which you have never get near to, we may suspect),

well, my era so to speak only ended 6 years ago, the army hasnt fielded new explosives for blasting ops in nearly 30 years. i still talk to people in the army engineer corps and nothing new's been fielded in those 6 years. i use the data from my era as its factual data and isnt it always best to base discussions of this type in fact? with verifiable data? (i mean you wouldnt just take my say so would you? you'd want to be able to verify what i say yeah?) if we're not going to base in fact we're only speculating and then we might as well say it was anything. (holograms and space lasers anyone?)

7. lower than HE detonation speed, 3 to 4 km/sec

i dont disagree with the other 6 points but this one is most relevant. this is actually faster det velocity than anfo if i did the math right. 3km/s is 3000m/s is 9750fps ((3000*39)/12=9750) anfo=8900fps

so, while i wont deny that a TB would do a lot of damage in an enclosed area, i have to say that it would likely take a LARGE explosion to fail the building. heres why. to cut steel columns with explosives 3 are really only 3 ways. put shape charges around the column, doesnt take much (relativly speaking) to cut each one. in the case of the columns at the 66th floor its around 3.5lbs/ea. you can put C4 (or equivilant) on each one which would take 23.4lbs/ea. or, you can do a brute force blast which means that youre explosive has to have enough oomph to bust them all without being in contact with them. remember the truck bomb in 93 wasnt big enough (and honestly in the wrong place...not sure that mattered much though)

now, i know youre looking for some ultra low frequency explosive that no one would hear...but TB's arent THAT low frequency. im not sure its even physically possible to have an EXPLOSIVE that was such a low frequency as to be relativly silent (remember it would take a large explosion to do a brute force blast of the core columns)

so, i know you think my calculations are irrelevant, but they are quite relevant. in order for a CD theory to make sense and fit the observed events you have to understand how much explosive, of any kind, would be necessary to bring down the buildings. IF you do the math and realize that it would take an explosion on a magnitude that was so large you couldnt hide it, then you realize that based on the evidence, there was no explosion like that observed.

so even going on the high end of your posted det velocites, that puts it at ~13000fps, which would ROUGHLY equal something with an RE factor of .65 which means that to create a seizmic spike of ~2 you would need the EQUIVILANT of 51000lbs of tnt (and i rounded down)(admittedly i had to SWAG this as TB typically fall into the realm of aerial bombs and those dong get assigned RE factors so the previous figures were extrapolated from existing data and may be off a small (or large lol) amount, but id bet they are close enough as to illustrate my point)

now labtop, you too have seen poster after poster on many forums say how the falls "defied the laws of physics" yeah? can you honestly tell me that the idea of setting off an explosion equal to 25 tons of tnt doesnt defy the laws of physics?

""where do you expect all the air and smoke INSIDE the building to go if the ceiling COLLAPSES down onto it? ... ""

did i post that or someone else? its so hard to remember some days.

now im going to be honest, im not sure what point you were trying to make with the rest of the post ive quoted you from, are you saying that the collapse started lower than the impact zones even though thats what we see start to give out first?

because that raises another point, how would you use a thermobaric inside floors of a building that were on fire? as soon as your flamable material hit a spark...it may not detonate depending on the material but its likely it would burn which would cause your blast to be uneven, which is bad.
so the one thing i will agree is that IF this type of material was used, then it certainly wasnt on the impacted floors.

but then consider too, go a few floors lower and set off a TB, what should we have seen from nearly every window on that floor? either they all go shooting outward at once from the detonation. or they survived the detonation and get sucked into the vacuum (though since the building isnt sealed well enough for the falling debris to create a piston effect that causes air to bust out windows it certainly wouldnt be airtight enough for the momentary vacuum of a TB to suck any of them in right?)

last point to consider is that we're talking about a pretty big open area that is, as has been argued by many on the CT side, pretty rugged in construction. its going to take a decent sized device. you'd also want it pretty central in the area to insure an even filling of the space. that means it would likely have been sitting in the middle of the halway where the elevators were. no one noticed it? there were survivors afterall...

Originally posted by LaBTop
I have thought about that fairly new expansion-demolition powder, which if filled into a boxed-off type of steel column, and then whetted, will expand with such a tremendous force, that it will spread the column or beam open like a tulip.
That stuff is totally soundless, except the shearing noises of the metal.

I've used a cellulose material fitting that description for breaking rock to erect power poles in areas where explosives would upset the locals. It expands greatly in all directions but it's not fast and it's very imprecise - basicly you bore about a 2" hole into the the rock then wet the material and pack it in then wait about an hour to see how much fractured rock you can get out then break out the jackhammers etc to finish the job. Definitely not adaptable to remote control of any kind.