Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #670524

Re: energy and mass

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Am Freitag000027, 27.03.2026 um 16:51 schrieb Bill Sloman:
> On 27/03/2026 6:54 pm, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch000025, 25.03.2026 um 15:26 schrieb Ross Finlayson:
>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's always going to be somebody
>>>>>> who doesn't believe the official narrative of 9/11.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, but that wasn't the question.
>>>>>
>>>>> The question was:
>>>>>
>>>>> is there still anybody believing the official story? >>>
>>>> The rational majority.
>>>>
>>>>> The official story has more holes than a Swiss cheese and is actually
>>>>> an insult to rational thinking.
>>>>
>>>> The claims that you have been making - like the Twin Towers falling 
>>>> down
>>>> in ten seconds - don't suggest that you can do rational thinking, or
>>>> recognise it when you run into it.
>>>
>>> WTC7 is a usual outlier to otherwise the "Jones" theory versus
>>> the "NIST" theory.
>>
>> Stephan Jones was a proponent of a theory, that can't possibly be true.
>>
>> Jones assumed, that the WTC buildings were destroyed by explosions of 
>> nano-thermite.
>>
>> But the buildings didn't explode!
> 
> Thermite isn't an explosive. It just burns and gets very hot.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite
> 
>> What really happened that was far stranger than mini-nukes or 
>> nanothermite:
>>
>> The twin towers simply 'dustified' in mid-air and vanished.
> 
> It would have been very strange if it had happened. I've not seen 
> anybody sane claim that it did. The concrete got hot as the towers 
> burned, and got smashed into small rubble as each floor fell down on the 
> floor below as the steel frames got hot and failed. There was a great 
> deal of dust around after the Twin Towers had fallen down, so by no 
> means all of it "vanished"  - if any of it did
> 
>> Since Stephan Jones was also the expert for cold-fusion of the 
>> Department of Energy, I assumed, that Jones knew what had happened and 
>> wanted to divert the attention away from cold fusion.
>> ...
> 
> Cold fusion is weird - not because of anything it has been observed to 
> do, but because people have kept on looking at it since 1989 when Pons 
> and Fleischmann first reported it. I'd run into Martin Fleischmann when 
> I was post-doc at Southampton 1971-73, and he was a professor there and 
> he was perfectly respectable electrochemist back then.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion
> 
> The proposition that it might have destroyed the Twin Towers is 
> definitely lunacy.
> 

I have not said, that the WTC was destroyed by cold fusion.

I actually assumed a 'weaponised' version of the so called 'Hutchison 
effect' (similar to John Hutchison himself, together with Tom Beardon 
and Judy Wood).

But possibly Stephan Jones assumed it was 'cold fusion', because he was 
an expert in that topic and that might eventually have looked a little 
similar.

Then: in an effort to protect his alleged masters, he inventent a 
nonsense theory of nano-thermite-explosions (that was my guess).

This theory cannot possibly be true, because there was no explosion and 
the actual effect was also far stranger than cold fusion could possibly 
had been.


TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-18 09:11 +0100
  Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-18 21:28 +1100
    Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-19 12:10 +0100
      Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-20 01:35 +1100
        Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 07:44 -0700
          Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 07:52 -0700
            Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 09:42 -0700
              Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 09:58 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 10:28 -0700
        Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-20 11:00 +0100
          Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-21 02:54 +1100
            Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-22 10:31 +0100
              Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-22 22:21 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-23 09:21 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-23 22:31 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-23 08:11 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-25 09:02 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-25 21:40 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-25 07:26 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-27 08:54 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-28 02:51 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-29 09:56 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Daren Remond <ndno@dmrndd.us> - 2026-03-29 13:04 +0000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-30 08:33 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-30 01:32 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-29 07:39 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-30 08:48 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-30 18:15 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-30 10:17 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-31 09:13 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-31 22:46 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-03-31 13:57 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-25 08:59 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-25 22:01 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-26 15:00 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-27 02:47 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-27 09:13 +0100
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-28 03:17 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-03-27 10:39 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-29 10:19 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Cloro Sandiford <iofnd@dosc.us> - 2026-03-29 13:01 +0000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-30 08:31 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-31 02:45 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-03-31 09:39 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-31 23:10 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-01 09:47 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-02 02:34 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-04-01 18:23 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-03 10:12 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-03 23:42 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-05 09:57 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-06 02:53 +1000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-06 13:09 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-07 04:11 +1000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-08 09:13 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-08 22:56 +1000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-03 10:31 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-04 03:16 +1100
                Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-04-03 09:38 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-04 04:15 +1100
                Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-04-03 23:18 -0700
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-04 21:37 +1100
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-05 10:14 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-05 20:58 +1000
                Re: energy and mass Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-04-06 12:51 +0200
                Re: energy and mass Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-04-07 04:27 +1000
      Re: energy and mass The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-03-19 11:17 -0700

csiph-web