Plutonium wasn't salted throughout the building. The total amount used among all 6-10 devices would weigh 12g-20g, tops. But nuclear charges, especially plutonium ones, if the device is precise enough and successfully consumes all its fuel, 99% of the energy created will be X-rays (which will be absorbed by all the steel in the core, hence, all the molten steel we had for months and months).
The residual radiation created is also different (and significantly less long-lived) than created by uranium-based nuclear devices or other radiological bombs. Only the USGS would see it; most other detection regimes (such as the IAEA) are looking for North Korean/Iranian style bombs, which have an entirely different radiation profile. It was pure luck we discovered this.
These are interesting theories. I have not came across theories of weaponized nuclear reactions as a cause for the tower failures. I moved away from researching 9/11 long ago because it started getting convoluted and harder to dig into without supposition and lack of physical evidences to back up theories, since these matters rely heavily on detailed specifics in order to proof out. For instance, video footage I have seen specifically showing the main support columns that exhibited near 45 deg molten steel cut failures. This condition can and would be created by thermite but would require a mold to encase the beam precisely with a precise reactionary device in place.
Have any references you recommend, preferably read material over video presentations. Specifically that speak to the use of Uranium.
Plutonium wasn't salted throughout the building. The total amount used among all 6-10 devices would weigh 12g-20g, tops. But nuclear charges, especially plutonium ones, if the device is precise enough and successfully consumes all its fuel, 99% of the energy created will be X-rays (which will be absorbed by all the steel in the core, hence, all the molten steel we had for months and months).
The residual radiation created is also different (and significantly less long-lived) than created by uranium-based nuclear devices or other radiological bombs. Only the USGS would see it; most other detection regimes (such as the IAEA) are looking for North Korean/Iranian style bombs, which have an entirely different radiation profile. It was pure luck we discovered this.
These are interesting theories. I have not came across theories of weaponized nuclear reactions as a cause for the tower failures. I moved away from researching 9/11 long ago because it started getting convoluted and harder to dig into without supposition and lack of physical evidences to back up theories, since these matters rely heavily on detailed specifics in order to proof out. For instance, video footage I have seen specifically showing the main support columns that exhibited near 45 deg molten steel cut failures. This condition can and would be created by thermite but would require a mold to encase the beam precisely with a precise reactionary device in place. Have any references you recommend, preferably read material over video presentations. Specifically that speak to the use of Uranium.