Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

'Super Steel' Sought For Fusion Reactors

samzenpus posted more than 5 years ago | from the everything-melts dept.

Power 421

Smivs writes "New research shows how steel will fail at high temperatures because of the magnetic properties of the metal. Scientists say an understanding of how the Twin Towers collapsed will help them develop the materials needed to build fusion reactors. The New York buildings fell when their steel backbones lost strength in the fires that followed the plane impacts. Dr Sergei Dudarev told the British Association Science Festival that improved steels were now being sought. The principal scientist at the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) said one of the first applications for these better performing metals would be in the wall linings of fusion reactors."

cancel ×

421 comments

If it doesn't work... (4, Funny)

maniac/dev/null (170211) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960023)

...it will be only the third time that fire has melted steel.

Re:If it doesn't work... (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960057)

Huh? Is this a 9/11 conspiracy thing?

Re:If it doesn't work... (4, Funny)

kcelery (410487) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960211)

Yes, this is could be.

The Twin Tower is built like a metal tube. So if it fails, it should fail in dignity, fail like a metal tube. But on that mighty day, PUFF (note: not flame). A metal tube turned into a pile of crackers.

Hell, tensile strength, bending moment, grain boundary, finite element... all thrown out of the window, because it was hit by black magic.

Where is my toad?

No magic involved (3, Funny)

Millennium (2451) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960895)

What do you mean, 'black magic'? A tube can be filled and if it is filled, when you fly your plane in, it gets in line and it's going to be destroyed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of fuel, enormous amounts of fuel.

Re:If it doesn't work... (0, Troll)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960347)

Yeah. The Twin Towers should have toppled over, but instead, they blew up like a building that was being imploded for demolition. Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.

The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.

Re:If it doesn't work... (5, Informative)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960443)

Popular Mechanics [popularmechanics.com] explains this. Not that I think it will matter to the conspiracy crowd.

Re:If it doesn't work... (4, Informative)

eggoeater (704775) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960459)

Yeah. The Twin Towers should have toppled over, but instead, they blew up like a building that was being imploded for demolition.

It figures that today of all days would bring out the conspiracy theories. So you're saying that a building weighing probably millions of tons could topple over a specific and single pivot point?

Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.

If the jet fuel is out in the open, where heat can dissipate, that would be true. But this was a whole LOT of fuel in an enclosed space, so as the fuel burnt, the steel could keep getting hotter and hotter. Burning fuel = energy released. If the energy cant escape, it builds up in the form of heat.

The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.

And the thousands of tons that slammed into it at high velocity had nothing to do with it? (Actually, I'm guessing that had something to do with it, but not sure.) If you're spinning theories here, you need to stick to WTC building 7, the collapse of which was thoroughly studied, and concluded that fire alone was the result of it's collapse.

Re:If it doesn't work... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960473)

Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.

You're dead right. It is. Well done.

Now perhaps if you'd care to stop frothing and go read the God Damn Article, you wouldn't look quite so much like a retarded kook.

PROTIP: The article talks about certain interesting properties of steel at temperatures below it's melting point.

Re:If it doesn't work... (0, Redundant)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960605)

Oh, piddle.

Stop shooting the messenger. I'm merely relaying what the conspiracy theories state. I'm not necessarily saying that it's 100% 'gospel truth'.

OTOH, as someone else pointed out, WTC 7 was NOT hit by a plane, and IT imploded right after its new owner was overheard on a cell phone by several people and a television news crew saying the words 'pull it', which is construction industry jargon for 'ignite the explosives'.

Again, I don't know whether I believe the conspiracy theorists or not, but I will say that I do think that there is more to 9/11 than meets the eye. If you look at it objectively as I do, it does definitely have the appearance of being staged.

Re:If it doesn't work... (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960743)

I have also read that pull it is industry jargon for pulling a building with cables , not necessarily explosives.

I believe that there are a lot of people that do look at this objectively also, and they come to the conclusion that a conspiracy this large is freaking impossible.

There may be some oddities (ownership change) and some questions (timeline), but these are no reason to dismiss everyone who does not share in your belief is a sheep.

Re:If it doesn't work... (0)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960875)

Oh, I'm not dismissing everyone who dismiss the conspiracy theories as nonsense. I'm still very much on the fence. The oddities and timeline questions leave a lot open to discussion, definitely. OTOH, pulling off a conspiracy this large would be difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. If David Copperfield can make a large crowd of people believe he made the Statue of Liberty disappear into thin air, certainly some of the best and brightest can create the appearance that a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center was really the result of a terrorist attack.

Re:If it doesn't work... (2, Informative)

Fleeced (585092) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960575)

Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.

The steel doesn't need to melt to cause catastrophic failure... which is why, for instance, steel support beams on a bridge can collapse when a fuel tanker explodes.

The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.

Yeah... well, it was a bit more than a normal fire, wasn't it?

Re:If it doesn't work... (4, Insightful)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960681)

Yeah. The Twin Towers should have toppled over, but instead, they blew up like a building that was being imploded for demolition. Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.

In Oakland CA, a tanker truck carrying gasoline crashed under an overpass crashed [sfgate.com] and burst into flames. (Everyone was OK) The heat from the gasoline caused the metal in the overpass to weaken and the whole thing collapsed.

This pretty much proves that burning fuel can cause metal to weaken and a structure to collapse. This is especially true when you consider that jet fuel burns hotter than gasoline.

The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.

Maybe so, but it happened. Other examples would be the one I listed (although not a building) and WTC7.

In other words, "Truthers" are full of shit. They've been debunked countless times and they keep coming back. Accept it, you are wrong. There is no government conspiracy. There was no demolition. Terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into buildings where the heat from the fires caused them to collapse. That is FACT!

Re:If it doesn't work... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960823)

Terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into buildings where the heat from the fires caused them to collapse. That is FACT!

No it isn't.

See what I did there? I debunked your well supported statement with an equally well supported statement of mine.

Re:If it doesn't work... (5, Insightful)

SmurfButcher Bob (313810) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960915)

> The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.

Err... steel fails in fire all the time. It's a very common event... to the point that fire fighters have hated steel constructions for the better part of a decade.

Ooo, there's even a wp thingy on a recently famous example of a department that didn't comprehend that steel can and will fail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_Sofa_Super_Store_fire [wikipedia.org]

I think part of the confusion stems from the fact that these newer structures are held together by math... not mass.

The history of steel as a "massive" construction element makes people think that a steel truss construction will rival the failure mode and resilience of the old, truely massive, heavy timber constructions... or at least inherit some of the legacy of something "massive". It's freakin STEEL, man!

But it isn't true - trusses work because of math, not mass. The failure progressions are totally different than the evolutions of old (most notably, there often is no progression; one element fails, the entire assembly fails simultaneously.)

yeah! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960031)

First post!

shameless (0, Flamebait)

frietbsd (943773) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960035)

bit shamefull to abuse this day, on which the world remembers the victims of this horrible disaster to make these statements how usefull it could be for science.
It is almost like they are happy the attacks took place.

Re:shameless (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960071)

So, are you speaking of shameless steel? :)

Re:shameless (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960081)

Or how useful it will be for attracting funding for science. Hate the game, not the player.

Re:shameless (5, Insightful)

runlevelfour (1329235) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960095)

What kind of nonsense is that? Anytime something undesirable in the world happens no one is able to learn anything from it? Or are you merely asserting no one can openly say they learned anything from it? Yep, science should take a back seat to sensibilities. Excuse me while I roll my eyes. And because I am a prick I must note that the world trade centers collapsing is a footnote compared to the numerous other tragedies that people don't bother to learn about let alone cry about seven years later. Terrible that those people died but it is minuscule compared to many other losses of life in other countries.

Why is this posted today? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960547)

Why not a month ago or a month from now Why today...?

Re:Why is this posted today? (1)

hobbit (5915) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960871)

Because today is the day we are having this discussion?

I'm sorry if the WTC attack affected you personally, but today is also the anniversary of thousands of people worldwide dying as a result of genocide. Would you deny their remembrance?

Re:shameless (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960163)

I disagree. I think it would be the most wonderful irony if a crucial piece of the technology required to provide humanity with a cheap source of energy came from their attacks. The only reason the theocracies in the middle east have any power is that they have a natural resource that the rest of the world needs. With commercial fusion, this evaporates (you can make oil for plastics from air and water if you have enough cheap energy).

Or would you rather that their deaths only benefited Al-Quaeda?

Re:shameless (2, Insightful)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960941)

The 9/11 connection is just a PR plug, though -- those properties of steel have been known for a long time. (I can't guarantee they were known when the building were built, but certainly they were known prior to the event.)

Re:shameless (0, Troll)

javilon (99157) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960993)

The only reason why Theocracies on the middle east exist is that the USA needs them so they can pump out the resources of the country without having to care for the general population. They would not be able to do that with a democracy.

So in a way, you are right. The root cause is oil.

Re:shameless (2, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960771)

"bit shamefull to abuse this day, on which the world remembers the victims of this horrible disaster to make these statements how usefull it could be for science."

Every such calamity is worthy of study, because we learn things we do not expect and might miss otherwise. Had the Twin Towers been an accident instead of murder, their study would have been just as important (but with less emotional baggage).

Up Next (4, Funny)

meist3r (1061628) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960053)

Ceramics Compound Steel with NanoMesh stabilizing support. Or a couple of layers of transparent aluminium ... oh wait, we ain't supposed to have that yet.

Re:Up Next (5, Funny)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960439)

You'd invent more stuff if you used your computer mouse instead of talking to it.

Re:Up Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960723)

Was that an IT crowd reference?

Re:Up Next (3, Funny)

berashith (222128) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960803)

A keyboard? How quaint.

Re:Up Next (1)

Jarik_Tentsu (1065748) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960739)

Scientists say an understanding of how the Twin Towers collapsed will help them develop the materials needed to build fusion reactors.

For a second there I was ready to applaud Frodo for taking down Bara-Dur [wikipedia.org] and the Ents for taking Isengard [wikipedia.org] in the interests of science.

Then I realized it was "Twin Towers" and not "Two Towers".

~Jarik

Re:Up Next (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960989)

Tolkien never specifically mentioned which of the many towers in Middle Earth were the two towers of The Two Towers. I always pictured it as being Minas Tirith and Minas Ithil, the towers on either side of the Gap of Rohan because that's the only place where there were two towers, and one was controlled by the good team, and one by the bad team.

Re:Up Next (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960919)

Wait a minute, why not use null-grav steel as in The Star of the Guardian series?

Oh yeah, we don't have that yet either.

Come on ISS. Capture me an asteroid and send in the space miners! Unruly bunch though.

We've learned something new about 9/11 (3, Insightful)

VShael (62735) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960065)

Would the fact that we've learned something new about steel thanks to the way the Twin Towers fell, silence the conspiracy lovers?

No, of course not. What the hell was I thinking there?

It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960183)

Would the fact that we've learned something new about steel thanks to the way the Twin Towers fell, silence the conspiracy lovers?

No, of course not. What the hell was I thinking there?

Well, we're getting WAY off topic from the original story here but people deal with loss differently. Some Americans have a near psychotic desire to be a part of bringing justice to those responsible. 9/11 affected us all in different ways. From losing loved ones to losing a sense of security to losing our rights, everyone believes they've lost something.

I listened to a This American Life episode where a man whose mother was raped and killed spent a large part of his life going over what had happened. He even went so far as to go to the jail and interview one of the murderers. He was so convinced there was more to it than just a random robbery gone wrong.

The "Truthers" (as they call themselves) are trying to cope with this in a unique way where they will relentlessly seek the truth--to a fault. They won't ever be satisfied because the attacks were so inconceivable that there must be an equally outrageous explanation for them. Occam's Razor is not in their reasoning kit anymore.

Personally, I think we just need to let them have their community and leave them alone and give them the information they need. You can't change the way these people think and as Americans they have this right to believe what they want--so long as they don't go infringing on other people's life, liberty & pursuit of happiness.

Following World War II, the public's imagination has gone wild from JFK's assassination to 9/11. It's simply something that can no longer be avoided.

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (1)

fprintf (82740) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960193)

I just have to commend you on your correct usage of "losing". I am so sick of seeing "loose" and "loosing" instead. Kudos.

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960303)

I just have to commend you on your correct usage of "losing". I am so sick of seeing "loose" and "loosing" instead. Kudos.

Okay, is this the opposite of a grammar Nazi?

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (3, Funny)

Tenebrousedge (1226584) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960861)

No, just an extremely rare "pleased" variation of the species: Grammaticus patriasocialis gauisus. These creatures have not often been studied by mankind, as they tend to evaporate when exposed to television, billboards, and ninety-nine percent of the American public. Their breeding habits are unknown, and their size and shape can vary dramatically. Since they frequently are seen to inhabit the lofty realms of thought without visible means of support, it can safely be concluded that they are weightless.

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960221)

Following World War II, the public's imagination has gone wild from JFK's assassination to 9/11. It's simply something that can no longer be avoided.

It was always burning since the world's been turning.

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (3, Insightful)

Eli Gottlieb (917758) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960257)

As always, conspiracies are just a conspiracy to get people to believe in conspiracies. Did you know 9/11 wasn't an inside job?

one could say the same of creationists (0)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960375)

but the problem with creationists, and 9/11 truthers, is that they industriously involve themselves in political process. the creationists are actually making progress in the hinterlands. the effect is that some poor children's education suffers for their idiocy

same with the 9/11 truthers: you can't just leave them alone. you leave them alone, and the next thing you know, there is a vote being made in the pennsylvania senate asking for a $100 million state investigation into the "real" reason the fourth airplane crashed in pennsylvania. more press coverage, more trolling, more idiocy

it would be nice to let silly people be silly people by themselves. and for most classes of silly people, you are right, you can do that. but for classes of silly people who actively seek to have their silliness crammed down the throats of others, we must actively push back against that

Re:one could say the same of any belief... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960563)

this goes for everything...not just creationists.
for example the Gay and Lesbian rights movement is now being crammed down peoples throat so they can be accepted, but in reality their agenda is removing the rights of christians since they have no tolerance for that kind of action due to their beliefs.

fact is in America you need to learn that not everyone is going to accept you for who you are and what you believe and that is their right as well.

   

Re:one could say the same of creationists (0, Troll)

eiceic (1362107) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960889)

There was a time when the crowd would ostracize you for answering even number one as TRUE....

1) The world is round TRUE/FALSE
2) The sun is the center of the solar system TRUE/FALSE
3) Santa is a fairy tale designed to keep kids in control during the year TRUE/FALSE
4) God is a fairy tale designed to keep kids/adults in control during the year TRUE/FALSE
5) Humans evolved from apes TRUE/FALSE
6) 9/11 was a controlled implosion TRUE/FALSE

Before writing the "truthers" off as silly, try and think back to when you believed in Santa and you slowly changed your world view as the facts started piling up against the whole idea..

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (4, Insightful)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960471)

The "Truthers" (as they call themselves) are trying to cope with this in a unique way where they will relentlessly seek the truth--to a fault. They won't ever be satisfied because the attacks were so inconceivable that there must be an equally outrageous explanation for them. Occam's Razor is not in their reasoning kit anymore.

Nonsense. The "truthers" are not seeking the truth in any way, shape, or form. All they are "seeking" is ways to warp the facts beyond recognition to support their neurotic preconception.

Seeking truth is what science and religion are about. They have different ways of judging it. I suppose one could make the case that the truthers are a bizarre, benighted, and perverse form of cult, but they are in no sense scientists.

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960761)

Occam's Razor argument 'works' fine under your government has lied to you so many times that it becomes the most mundane explanation to assume they are lying. At that point, with this administration, Occam's razor favors the explanation that involves a lie.

Re:It's Certainly a Strange Coping Mechanism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960991)

While I don't disagree with anything you said, and I'm not for a minute suggesting that 11/9 was an inside job, there is a danger in relagating all conspiracies to the loony bin.

Big business/ politicians *are* up to some seriously underhand, cynical, sneaky, nasty shit. Just look at the whole phone tapping immunity fiasco, or the billions being funnelled into Haliburton et al via the Iraq war. Corruption is everywhere, so it isn't entirely crazy to believe some of these conspiracies.

As I say, I don't think the Neocons orchestrated the twin tower thing themselves, but they certainly wasted no time in using it to their advantage with a level of cynical hypocrisy at least as repellent as the attack itself. Given the disregard for human life, rights, morals and dignity they've displayed since then, I honestly wouldn't put such an atrocity past them if it suited their interests.

In short, just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean that there isn't an secret club of rich, powerful fuckwads who pull all sorts of filthy strings on a global scale and consider themselves above any kind of legal or political accountability.

Oh, and please don't interpret this as a partisan bash against the Neocons either. The neocons are a gang of parasitic, sociopathic, soulless scumballs, but don't for a minute kid yourself that the other guy is any better.

Vote Kodos!

Re:We've learned something new about 9/11 (1)

wish bot (265150) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960255)

We haven't learned anything new about steel - this has been know for....as long as there has been fire codes and steel buildings.

The fact that conspiracy theorist choose to ignore widely known properties of steel and steel construction doesn't make this news relevant.

I also find this article slightly distasteful...9/11 has nothing to do with the search for new steels; there are plenty of varieties of steel with all sorts of different properties - maybe this physicist should go and speak with a engineer or material scientist and stop sprouting rubbish.

Re:We've learned something new about 9/11 (1)

raddan (519638) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960465)

Unfortunately, the softening of the metal in the Twin Towers have absolutely nothing to do with the subject of the article. It's just attention-grabbing. The mechanisms for deformation of steel suspected in the WTC collapse were already well-known (thermoplasticity), and evidence of some heating was confirmed in NIST's final report [nist.gov] on the WTC tower collapses in 2005. Interestingly, NIST says that primary event causing the deformation is unknown:

Throughout this report, it should be recognized that while the physical damage and failure mechanisms observed were reported in their present condition, in most cases it was difficult or impossible to conclude which extreme loading event may have led to the damage. In other words, the damage may have been a result of the aircraft impact, the subsequent fires, the ensuing collapse of the buildings, or the subsequent handling related to the recovery efforts. It should also be recognized that in many cases it was difficult or impossible to conclude when fire exposure occurred, that is, whether the fire exposure transpired prior to collapse or during the time period that the piece was in the debris pile at the WTC site (for some samples, possibly up to 4 months). (NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, WTC Investigation, p. 2)

(Disclaimer: my brother works for NIST, in this department, although he did not participate in this investigation)

Re:We've learned something new about 9/11 (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960491)

Would the fact that we've learned something new about steel thanks to the way the Twin Towers fell

Nothing "new" was learnt. You didn't know that hot steel gets softer?

As TFA says:

"[The steel] becomes very soft. It is not melting but the effect is the same," said Dr Dudarev. He said blacksmiths had exploited this property for hundreds of years - it allows iron to become pliable at temperatures much lower than its melting point.

It was just irresistible for the journalists to gratuitously link this to the anniversary of 9/11. I really doubt they would be using this "super steel" in skyscrapers, it would probably cost a fortune and having jet planes full of fuel crashing into them is a very, very, very, low risk event. The Twin Towers, like all such buildings, were built exactly as strong as they would need to be to withstand storms and earthquakes, but not acts of war. You want that, build a bunker, not a skyscraper.

Bullshit story with a bullshit argument (1, Interesting)

odourpreventer (898853) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960531)

We didn't learn anything new. Whatever story you choose to believe, the only facts are that two planes flew into two of the strongest buildings on the planet, and then they crumbled like a house of cards. Structural failure, insider job, whatever; the only thing that could have provided any answers was scooped up and shipped off to China.

With all the evidence gone, all the rest is at best theories. And theories won't help you build any reactors.

Re:We've learned something new about 9/11 (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960897)

We sure have learned something. Don't let the shadow government agents sneak around the fusion reactors or they will try to force the steel to fail to create severely public drama in order to get the sheeple to buy in to their next secret conquest.

Yes, because magnetism causes steel to melt. (-1, Troll)

crhylove (205956) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960069)

More specifically, magnetism causes steel to melt 100 stories down from the impact zone, leaving remnants like this:

http://a986.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/72/l_a567c508f431db9f78e20057b5b59fb9.jpg [myspacecdn.com]

Also, governments are prescient enough to determine exactly what day and time terrorist attacks will happen, and then schedule terrorism drills for the exact same time, causing NORAD to fail to act in time! These are statistical inevitabilities!! The truthers are nuts!

http://www.loosechange911.com/download/NORAD/NORAD.torrent [loosechange911.com]

There is no simpler explanation that has been seen time and time again throughout history during the fascist takeover of a democracy!

Re:Yes, because magnetism causes steel to melt. (1)

thefirelane (586885) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960093)

These are statistical inevitabilities!!

What's really funny, is you actually said something true, and completely contradicted what you wanted to say. Self-ownage FTW! (or whatever)

Re:Yes, because magnetism causes steel to melt. (1)

Siener (139990) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960117)

I made an incorrect moderation on this comment. Commenting to cancel

Re:Yes, because magnetism causes steel to melt. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960119)

Unfastened coins [thebestpag...iverse.net] . Truthiness factor 11!

Re:Yes, because magnetism causes steel to melt. (1)

Timberwolf0122 (872207) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960667)

More specifically, magnetism causes steel to melt 100 stories down from the impact zone, leaving remnants like this: http://a986.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/72/l_a567c508f431db9f78e20057b5b59fb9.jpg [myspacecdn.com]

So your saying that the release of energy from the mass of 100 flaws of skyscraper falling wouldn't be able to shear and melt an iron girder, realy?! 9/11 was caused by a bunch of pissed off religious fanatics.

Little Stevie Wonder said to post (he's blind u c) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960073)

Very superstitious, writing's on the wall,
Very superstitious, ladders bout' to fall,
Thirteen month old baby, broke the lookin' glass
Seven years of bad luck, the good things in your past.

oo When you believe in things that you don't understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain't the way

Very superstitious, wash your face and hands,
Rid me of the problem, do all that you can,
Keep me in a daydream, keep me goin' strong,
You don't wanna save me, sad is my song.

When you believe in things that you don't understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain't the way, yeh, yeh.

Very superstitious, nothin' more to say,
Very superstitious, the devil's on his way,
Thirteen month old baby, broke the lookin' glass,
Seven years of bad luck, good things in your past

When you believe in things that you don't understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain't the way, no, no, no

So, Little Steve Wonder disagrees with the slashdot herd. Superstistion AIN'T THE WAY !! NO! NO! NO!

Meh, they are trying too hard (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960085)

everyone knows all you have to do is strip a gundam and you can have all the super steel you would ever need.

They Should ask Thulsa Doom how to make it strong (4, Interesting)

ObitMan (550793) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960103)

"Steel isn't strong, boy. Flesh is stronger. Look around you." Thulsa motions to some of the thousands of followers surrounding his mountain who worship him as the mouthpiece of Set. He points up to the top of a cliff, "There, on the rocks, that beautiful girl." He motions to the girl, "Come to me, my child." The girl steps off the cliff and falls to her death. "That is strength, boy. That is power: the strength and power of flesh. What is steel compared to the hand that wields it? Look at the strength of your body, the desire in your heart. I gave you these...."

Re:They Should ask Thulsa Doom how to make it stro (0)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960405)

also, if super steel is so important, I'll be rich from melting down my buns of super steel!

Re:They Should ask Thulsa Doom how to make it stro (3, Funny)

baKanale (830108) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960717)

It's people! 'Super Steel' is PEOPLE!

In the interest of education... (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960113)

For those haven't been introduced to steel and its myriad properties (depending upon alloy composition), here's a background article [wikipedia.org] for you.

Re:In the interest of education... (1, Funny)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960175)

And if you are wondering what the hell "Wikipedia" is, I have a background article for you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]

Re:In the interest of education... (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960199)

And if you are wondering what the hell an "article" is, I have a background article for you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_(publishing) [wikipedia.org]

Re:In the interest of education... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960387)

And if you are wondering what "hell" is, I have a background article for you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell [tinyurl.com]

Re:In the interest of education... (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960485)

Rickroll?
Goatse?
2 girls, 1 cup?

No, this is far worse. Thank goodness for LinkNark.

Re:In the interest of education... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960521)

And if you're wondering what "is" is, you're Bill Clinton.

Current record holder (3, Informative)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960115)

The highest performing 'steel' currently seems to be what's called '"maraging steel', but calling it steel seems a bit odd since the alloy contains next to no carbon.

Tungsten is a lot tougher than just about any steel, and it's often used the coating alloys of for example drill bits used in industrial CNC applications.

The point of this article eludes me.

Re:Current record holder (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960363)

Sorry, tungsten (pure) is not very thought. You can drill it and cut it with standard tools. Tungsten-carbide alloy is really thought.
I know because pure tungsten is used to stop radioactivity (it's 50% better than lead), and I work on that field.

Irony if this works. (5, Interesting)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960155)

If it worked and we can make Fusion Reactors. This would leave some irony to the terrorist.

The Terrist may think they won because once we go Fusion we won't need to protect our oil interests thus mostly ignoring that area of the world, except for the occasional humanitarian mission, thus reducing our influcene in their countries...
However because we are not funding those countries with money they end up bankrupt in far more trouble then with the US involved.

When the Terrorist actually win they loose, because their goals will lead to their destruction.

Re:Irony if this works. (1)

asifyoucare (302582) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960239)

Steel ... Irony ... boom tish

Re:Irony if this works. (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960317)

Holy rusted metal, Batman!

Re:Irony if this works. (1)

_2Karl (1121451) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960337)

Why have the Terrorists lost? Surely their whole mission is to get the western fingers out of the eastern pie. If the twin tower collapse leads to fusion power and subsequently the western withdrawal from the middle east, then that is mission accomplished for the Terrorists. Regardless of whether this plunges their country into financial darkness or not, their goals will be met. I'd imagine they will then focus on a new set of goals which don't involve the mass murder of thousands of people in another country. I could be wrong, I'm not a terrorist.

Re:Irony if this works. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960787)

You neglect another theory as to why they kill rape and maim.

They want to install a caliphate, destroying all other infidel religions and kill all non-believers in a 'holy' religion.
They will never stop until they are all destroyed, is the common response...

Re:Irony if this works. (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960345)

In the meantime, they win as their actions remain a strong electoral argument 7 years after the facts and that they still scare people.

Re:Irony if this works. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960349)

> The Terrist may think they won
> When the Terrorist actually win they loose

LRN2SPELL&PLURALIZE, N00B

Complete lies! (1, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960173)

Everyone knows steel doesn't lose strength when heated up, it's magic and goes from being a full strength solid to instantly being melted into a liquid at 1500C!

Haven't the 9/11 conspiracy theorists taught these scientists anything???

How many errors can there be in one short article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960191)

1. "Steels melt at about 1,150C (2,102F), but lose strength at much lower temperatures". Try 1500C

3."The peak in this pliability is at 911.5C, but begins at much lower temperatures, at around 500C (932F) - a temperature often reached during building fires.". Nope. 911C is the equilibrium temperature of the Austenite-Ferrite phase transformation, but it doesn't correspond to the point of minimum strength in anything other than pure iron, and structural steel isn't pure iron.

2. "The roaring fire mid-way up the building heated the steel struts, and once temperatures rose above 500C the structure became elastic". Try plastic, not elastic. In structures elastic=good, plastic=bad.

Don't get it from UKAEA (4, Funny)

tygerstripes (832644) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960197)

I know they produce stylish, compact and inexpensive wall-linings for fusion reactors, but the self-assembly is a fucking nightmare, and you always end up spending at least fifty quid on candles too.

What about gold titanium? (0)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960203)

You know, that layer on Iron Man that makes him invulnerable to everything. That should do the trick.

Good LUCK! (4, Interesting)

redelm (54142) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960225)

It is not as if high strength hasn't always been sought after in steels (iron-carbon alloy). INcluding high temperature strength. The usual solution is various nickel alloys starting with the austenitic stainless steels and going up from there (HK-40, HP modified).

Yes, we may yet find some interesting corners on phase diagrams, especially via combinatorial chemistry and high-throughput experiementation. But please do not pretent this search is anything remotely novel.

For many high temperature applications, the usual solution is cold wall designs with refractory (insulating alumina) linings keeping the load bearing steels cool. With or without a (thermal expansion problematic) liner (usually austenitic SS) as a membrane seal.

Steel not the only material out there... (5, Insightful)

evilviper (135110) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960243)

Scientists say an understanding of how the Twin Towers collapsed will help them develop the materials needed to build fusion reactors.

Steel is used so widely, in large part, because it's cheap... Iron is one of the most abundant elements on the planet. Many other materials exist that are stronger than steel, lighter than steel, handle MUCH higher temperatures, etc., etc.

For a fusion reactor, however, "cheap" isn't going to be all that important... More exotic materials that can better handle high temperatures would be easily within reach when you're able to generate that much power.

The article completely fails to explain why we, for some reason, MUST use some (not-yet invented) form of "steel" for the walls of fusion reactors. Boron Carbide, Tungsten, titanium, etc., sound like much better options for this application. While this article sounds like a flimsy excuse to exploit this anniversary.

Re:Steel not the only material out there... (3, Informative)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960703)

Iron is one of the most abundant elements on the planet.

Actually iron is less abundant than aluminum, but it has the advantage of being readily mined, refined, and made into structural steel.

The earth's crust is 61% silica, 16% alumina, 7% rust (iron oxide component of iron ore), 6% line, 5% magnesia, and 5% other stuff. The reason aluminum alloy does not predominate in the structures we build has more to do with the difficulty of smelting, refining, alloying, and heat treating it than its suitability. The mirror image is the great ease of producing ready to use steel I-beams from raw iron ore.

Fire did not bring down the 3 buildings. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960279)

The buildings were imploded.

So scientists will gain nothing if they
try to figure out how heat brought down
3 buildings; because fire was not the cause.

Re:Fire did not bring down the 3 buildings. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960393)

Translation:

My tatas are larger than my brain. I love cooked sushi. Help me Tom Cruise. I communicate with the mothershhip on the eve of the universal softball match.

Re:Fire did not bring down the 3 buildings. (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960727)

The buildings were imploded.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

Re:Fire did not bring down the 3 buildings. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960807)

> "You keep using that word. I do not
> think it means what you think it means."

It means explosives were installed in the
buildings prior to the planes hitting it.

After a short burning time the explosives
were triggered and the buildings fell onto
their footprint.

Other steel buildings in the past burned
hotter and longer and did not fall.

The only three steel buildings ever to collapse
due to fire were those from 9/11.

Cheers

translation (1)

psycho sparky (896110) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960289)

we used fusion devices to bring down the towers

Mythril (3, Funny)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960381)

Steel just isn't good enough, something like a fusion reactor needs more Magical metals, for example they could look into using Mythril or Adamantite for getting some super strong metal walls...

Re:Mythril (4, Funny)

SmurfButcher Bob (313810) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960587)

The fusion reactor in MY house is built from SOLID UNOBTANIUM.

Just for fun, let's not forget: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24960385)

By 1991, 92 groups of researchers from 10 different countries had reported excess heat, tritium, neutrons or other nuclear effects.[73] Over 3,000 cold fusion papers have been published including about 1,000 in peer-reviewed journals (see indices in further reading, below). In March 1995, Dr. Edmund Storms compiled a list of 21 published papers reporting excess heat and articles have been published in peer reviewed journals such as Naturwissenschaften, European Physical Journal A, European Physical Journal C, Journal of Solid State Phenomena, Physical Review A, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, and Journal of Fusion Energy (see indices in further reading, below).

The generation of excess heat has been reported by (among others):

                                * Michael McKubre, director of the Energy Research Center at SRI International,
                                * Giuliano Preparata (ENEA (Italy))
                                * Richard A. Oriani (University of Minnesota, in December 1990),
                                * Robert A. Huggins (at Stanford University in March 1990),
                                * Yoshiaki Arata (Osaka University, Japan),
                                * T. Mizuno (Hokkaido University, Japan),
                                * T. Ohmori (Japan),

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Experimental_reports [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]

"Despite a backdrop of meager funding and career-killing derision from mainstream scientists and engineers, cold fusion is anything but a dead field of research. Presenters at the MIT event estimated that 3,000 published studies from scientists around the world have contributed to the growing canon of evidence suggesting that small but promising amounts of energy can be generated using the infamous tabletop apparatus."

"MIT's Peter Hagelstein, on the other hand, said "cold fusion" reactions have yielded surplus energy from as far back as the initial experiments in 1989. Verification of these controversial results is not the problem -- many labs around the world have reproduced parts of the results many times. "

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/08/cold_fusion?currentPage=all# [wired.com] [wired.com]

U.S. Navy Report Supports Cold Fusion:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue44/navy.html [infinite-energy.com] [infinite-energy.com]

""Last March, scientists at the annual conference of the august American Physical Society heard presentations on cold fusion. Next month, the Second International Conference on Future Energy will be held in Washington, D.C. The vast majority of physicists remains skeptical, but at the Office of Naval Research, six of the nine experiments performed produced an unexplainable amount of excess heat.""

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060808/REPOSITORY/608080316&SearchID=73253345954312 [concordmonitor.com] [concordmonitor.com]

"Researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have developed a tabletop accelerator that produces nuclear fusion at room temperature, providing confirmation of an earlier experiment conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), while offering substantial improvements over the original design."

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/ny_team_confirms_ucla_tabletop_fusion_10017.html [scienceblog.com] [scienceblog.com]

Science in Neglect - Nobel Laureate Speaks Out For Cold Fusion:
http://newenergytimes.com/news/2005/2005Lietz-ScienceInNeglectJosephson.htm [newenergytimes.com] [newenergytimes.com]

"The foreword by Dr. Frank Gordon in a [extern] summary report of February 2002 is so far the strongest statement of the Navy about their research:

"We do not know if Cold Fusion will be the answer to future energy needs, but we do know the existence of Cold Fusion phenomenon through repeated observations by scientists throughout the world. It is time that this phenomenon be investigated so that we can reap whatever benefits accrue from additional scientific understanding. It is time for government funding organizations to invest in this research. "

http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/18/18580/1.html [heise.de] [heise.de]

Edmund Storms (Los Alamos National Laboratory), discusses the methods used to generate low energy nuclear reactions (LENR):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltZhii3g2HY [youtube.com] [youtube.com]

First invent your fusion reactor (5, Insightful)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960413)

At the moment its like saying "this will be really useful for when I genetically engineer a dragon".

Vessel linings? (1)

kidtexas (525194) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960497)

I didn't think we were going to use some new "super steel" as the vessel lining (plasma facing component) in a fusion reactor/experiment. Current top contenders for this role are beryllium, graphite, tungsten, and moly. Most likely, some combination of them all.

The main chamber of ITER is currently set at beryllium - material with low atomic numbers are highly advantageous. I personally think liquid lithium walls are where its at, but I'm biased; thats what I did my research in.

However, a fusion reactor is going to be run with 'hot walls', where the vessel might be around 600 C, so I could see where you'd want an alloy that is still strong and can withstand 10+ T magnetic fields and not crap out. Of course, if we did come up with some low-Z refractory alloy, we'd probably use it in the first wall.

Re:Vessel linings? (1)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960839)

I'm certainly no expert, but I thought that work was being done on self cooled wall panels of lithium and vanadium. Apparently vanadium has favorable activation properties?

Planes (1)

arnodf (1310501) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960617)

The New York buildings fell when their steel backbones lost strength in the fires that followed the plane impacts. or not?

I'm confused. Would steel even work? (2, Interesting)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960629)

Aren't the magnetic fields in a Tokamak pretty intense? As in, you wouldn't want something ferromagnetic inside?

I thought the leading candidate was vanadium, for its low neutron capture cross section and quickly decaying activation products.

no need to worry (1)

mr_musan (1075927) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960767)

if they build it in the USA then as long as they keep at least one high ranking fat cat and don't load the place with explosives the terrorists won't attack, so they should just build it out of united states flags they are resistant to almost every thing including corruption, theft and reason.

not steel... (1)

rsw (70577) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960853)

I think you need Rearden metal. -=rsw

Obligatory... (1)

justaguylikeme (963377) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960877)

There's always Rearden metal! [wikipedia.org]

Ask 3DRealms... (1)

ZarathustraDK (1291688) | more than 5 years ago | (#24960931)

...for a supply of Duke Nukems' balls of steel.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...