There are also magnesium alloy wheels.

Good point. There are probably quite a few new alloys of various metals being used in the making of modern wheels/rims. That only makes it more difficult to know when those alloys would melt under fire conditions. I suspect some of these modern alloys have quite low melting points since they were designed for use due to their other properties of strength, resilience and weight rather than high heat since the generally will no see high operating temperatures in normal use. I wonder if we could find some burned out tire and wheel shop images that have melted wheels too. That could be an important find that could make the discussion more realistic and accurate.

You never answered where all the rubble from the twin towers went.

Buildings like the towers have fairly deep pits filled with basements in order to have the foundations of the building meet bedrock. A lot of the mass went there. A lot of the concrete mass also composed the the dust that spread quite a distance. The towers were not solid. Much of the volume the towers took up was empty (empty in the sense of not being filled with walls and other structural components). Sure there was lots of office items in there, but overall how much of that volume did those items take up? I'd say the overall volume of the towers were still mostly empty space so the there is much less material to account for here.

I don't have an explanation for why the concrete obliterated the way it did, but I do know the way the towers were constructed make for very little support on the interior since the structural steel members were mostly the outside skin rather than lots of interior columns. The concrete floors were not supported the same as other buildings. This would lead to more floors getting impacted by the mass above them as they fell. concrete is strong in compression but very weak in any other application of force, particularly flexure and torsion. I could see it failing due to the immense stresses and possibly turning to dust, but I can't say for sure. I do think that it is a common misconception by many to expect more rubble and debris from the towers because people assume them to have been much more massive (as in more mass) in their interiors really were.

The towers didn't come down from jets impacting them. They had to have been demolished with a lot of work done prior to the impacts. The planes were distractions. I don't have all the answers, and no one else does either, but the physics of the whole event support some possible scenarios and none of them seem to support directed energy weapons because, honestly, no one knows what that sort of thing would actually look like in real life. No one has ever been able to show a real DEW system operating at scale and against non-testing scenario targets. The footage that gets passed around as proof is no better than when china puts out their propaganda video on their achievements. Every calls the moon landing videos fake, but the same government produced these laser and energy weapon videos and all of a sudden they are considered 10000% real and true. Again, this is the bias of people who want to have things be a certain way and then suspending all skepticism in order to have the videos support their worldview. I cannot accept that knowing what I know about how our (((government))) and (((military))) operate.