Printer friendly copy of this article available here.

This article hopes to refute any and all claims that the lack of plane evidence from the alleged impact of flight 93 on 9/11 was a result of the aluminum being "liquified" or "atomized." I present all of my calculations and assumptions so that others can check my work and verify it for themselves.

I must say that I'm a little embarrassed for having to actually sit down and write this article up. I don't want to come across as elitist or condescending, but the conclusions I draw in this analysis are so obvious, I feel it's the equivalent of telling a person that their heart is still beating. Nevertheless, friends and scientists that I know personally and respect greatly have actually stated, with straight faces and genuine sincerity, that liquefaction or atomization is a possibility. However, most of these people have spent no more than 15 total minutes examining the official story, so I do not think they would truly believe such conjectures if they actually sat down and cranked out the numbers. I keep dreaming of the day when the scientists and experts of the world stop postulating all of these amazingly complex new models and explanations to hold the official story together. Beliefs, politics, and pride prevent them from picking up a piece of chalk and discovering these errors.

This is not intended to be a "smoking gun" report, but it merely exposes yet another major distortion in the official story. The calcs presented can be done by anyone who has taken and can still use basic algebra. I chose to be explicit rather than hand wave the calculations in order to be as thorough as possible.

There is a major difference between "liquefaction" and "atomization" of a material like aluminum. It is critical to understand the difference because there is an enormous energy difference between these two states. To turn room temperature aluminum to a liquid, the temperature must first rise to the melting temp Tmelt. After this, an additional amount of energy, the heat of fusion or HeatF, is required to change the state from a solid to a liquid. To get the aluminum to a gas, we would repeat the process from the liquid starting point. The liquid aluminum would need to be heated to the boiling point before the additional energy, the heat of vaporization or HeatV, is used to change it to a gas.

The only other parameter of importance is the heat capacities: CpSolid and CpLiquid. The heat capacity used in this article is the amount of energy (Joules) required to raise the temperature of a quantity (1 kg) by 1 degree (Celsius).

There are only 3 sources of energy possible for a jet impact: Jet fuel, kinetic energy, and oxidation reactions. I will mainly focus on the kinetic energy that comes from the speed of the plane, as it is the primary reason used by those who argue these "liquefaction" and "atomization" theories. For those that insist on taking the jet fuel into account, appendix A goes into the many details on why the assumptions, required to utilize this as a source to raise the temperature, are too unrealistic and violate years of existing empirical evidence. As for oxidation reactions (e.g. a thermite like reaction), these will be completely ignored for lack of a sufficient reactant source (iron oxide, aka "rust", or a large quantity of basic water as claimed by Greening http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf), lack of empirical precedent for such an occurrence, and lack of support for such an explanation in line with the official government story.

Figure 1: The impact of flight 93 had no large quantity of rust (iron oxide) or basic water (ph >10) available. Therefore, exothermic oxidation reactions are highly unlikely.

5 cases will be analyzed:

Here I repeat all explicit assumptions to ensure clarity and to eliminate misinterpretation:

Sourced http://aluminium.biography.ms/

Now that we have the basics covered, we can get into the meat of the matter. The only formula required is the kinetic energy (KE) equation.

KE = 1/2 mass * velocity^2

Where KE is measure in Joules, mass in kilograms, and velocity in meters per second. I will list results in other formats too, so that those who like measurements in "tons" and "miles per hour" don't feel too in the dark.

Case A: Velocity = 500 MPH = 223 meters/second

The calc is quite simple here. KE = 1/2 * 1 * 223^2 = 24980 Joules

Divide by the heat capacity CpSolid to get

Temp increase = KE/CpSolid = 24980/900 = 28 degrees Celsius =~ 50 degrees Fahrenheit

Thus, in case A, we have maximum theoretical temperature (under the assumptions listed in section 2) that isn't large enough to cook hot dogs on a grill in a reasonable amount of time. Thus, in order to get any appreciable temperature rise, we will need more speed!

Case B, C, D, E

Here, we look at it from the opposite viewpoint. We know the energy required to bring each kg of material up to the states listed in cases B through E (up to melting temp, melted, up to vaporization temp, vaporized). Thus, we can use these values to calculate the minimum velocity required for these 4 scenarios.

Rearranging the KE equation, we get Velocity= (2 * KE / mass)^(0.5)

Using the parameters in section 3, I obtain the following energy requirements (all in Joules).

More explicitly (for those who want is spelled out). The energy requirements are as follows:

Case B = (660-20)*900 =~ 576,000
Case C = (660-20)*900+399000 =~ 976,000
Case D = (660-20)*900+399000+(2518-660)*1100 =~ 3,149,000
Case E = (660-20)*900+399000+(2518-660)*1100+10800000 =~14,024,000

Substituting these energies back into the kinetic energy equation, we get the following velocities:

For my final calculation, I will determine just how much aluminum we could liquify or vaporize using all the kinetic energy available from the entire plane. This is actually quite simple. All I need to do is take the kinetic energy (KE) available per kg in Case A, and divide it by the energy required to liquify a kg in Case C and vaporize a kg in Case E. This ratio will give the maximum theoretical quantity of liquefiable or vaporizable material.

KE Case A / KE Case C = 24980/975,926 = 0.02559 = 2.6%

KE Case A / KE Case E = 24980/14024000 = 0.00178 = 0.2%

Thus, at worst, no less than 99.8% of the plane should have be recoverable. The 2.5% that had the potential of liquefaction (under the extreme assumptions that 100% of the kinetic energy injected into a small portion of the available aluminum) would have cooled in the same general area upon impact. Therefore, it was recoverable. This, again, is an absurd conversation to even have because the average temperature could not have increased by more than 28 degrees Celsius from the available kinetic energy.

It should be stated that case E, which I have concluded as the ONLY scenario with enough available kinetic energy to completely eliminate the evidence, requires the plane to fly at speeds 15 times faster than the speed of sound. This is by no means trivial. Many billions of dollars are spent yearly on developing military planes that can operate effectively up to around Mach 5, which would still give us only a third of speed required to achieve vaporization. Mach 15 is also many times faster than bullets coming from the highest powered commercial guns available. In short, Mach 15 is freagin fast!!!

One might venture a guess that a plunging 757 might be able to achieve Mach 1 — although this would most likely tear a 7X7 up in mid air because they are certainly not designed for such speeds. Even so, the maximum average temperature increase by Mach 1 speeds would be only 65 degrees C (120 degrees F), which is still almost 600 degrees C shy of even REACHING the melting point. The melting point requires Mach 3.1, which no 7X7 would be able to achieve, even if placed into a perfect veritical plunge with the engines at full thrust. It would break apart in the air before it even hit the ground.

The situation gets even worse for the steel/titanium alloys found in the engines, which have larger heats of fusion and vaporization.

Although the KE of a plane can certainly inflict damage upon a target (whether planned or accidental), it is safe to conclude that there is not nearly enough energy to cause any substantial rise in temperature for the plane under the assumption of uniform heat distribution. The maximum theoretical quantity of "vaporized" aluminum, under the extreme assumption of all the kinetic energy being concentrated into a small sections of the aluminum exterior, is an almost unnoticeable 0.2% at 500mph. Therefore, it is scientifically infeasible that any liquefaction or atomization occurred and all or most of the material should have been recoverable.

Jet fuel certainly is large source of energy. Nobody, including myself, would contest this. As little as 10,000 gallons can easily move a 100 ton plane from NY to LA. Sure, I could include it into my calculations with some stipulations, but I will not do so for two reasons:

First: It's bad enough to have to calculate speeds of Mach 15+ to show that the "vaporizing aluminum plane" arguments have no credibility. It's a whole new level of insanity to make assumptions that require the fuel to burn completely, and have absolutely 100% of the energy inject itself into the aluminum. To even calculate this quantity, is to give credence to the mere fact that it can happen. I contend that it cannot.

Secondly, I just know someone would take that quantity out of context (i.e. without mentioning all the detailed assumptions required with it) and post it as fact in some forum, some newsgroup, etc. We already have so much disinfo and bad information that I don't even want to give them the ammunition.

To be thorough, here are the reasons why I believe inclusion of jet fuel into the calculations is a non-issue.