Gravitatonal collapse of WTC buildings damaged by fire and newtons laws of momentum.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

***

Quote

Quote

******

Quote

Quote

Ten pictures the truthers hate:

http://layscience.net/node/124

I have been following these threads when they have popped up now and then. I do not remember engaging in this until now (but I may have)

The two most damaging photos to ryhs position, it seems to me, is the one where the debris is ahead of the building collapse and the one where said debris is falling on WTC #7.

But, I suppose these are photo shopped or something Part of the whole conspiracy....

Careful, your gonna give us away.

Did you follow any of the comments further down the page? There are of course some rhys types responding to him and in one of his responses he has a link to many pictures of the Pentagon hit. Pretty much destroys the "not a big plane" tripe.

Thanks for the link

Good info

While watching all the 911 shows on Saturday it was interssting to see all the eye witnesses, speaking to the media minutes after the attack at the Pentagon, who clearly saw it was a jetliner.

I tell myself each time that he post this crap not to respond. For all the People In SC that cannot agree on anything regarding religion and politicts but somehow manage to be in complete agreement on 911, that's got to say something.

[billvon 2,991]

>how can the dynamic load be greater than the static load . . .

I think I see the disconnect here.

Static load is the load that must be sustained when nothing is in motion. In the case of a rope, static load is the amount of weight it must hold while the weight is just dangling at the end. A dynamic load is the amount of force the rope must withstand both to support the weight of the object _and_ decelerate the load to a stop.

On a climbing rope, for example, the dynamic load is generally around ten times the static load. The reason this is so _low_ (only ten times) is that the rope is designed to stretch to increase the amount of time that the load has to decelerate, thus limiting max deceleration (and the resulting amount of force needed.)

If you change that load to a steel cable, the dynamic load may be hundreds or thousands of times the static load, because there is almost no stretch. It must decelerate the load within almost no distance, which requires a very, very large amount of force. That's why load limiters are often used to protect climbing harnesses while clipped into steel cables (sometimes used as fixed protection.)

In the case of the WTC, the top 15 floors of the North Tower weighed about 45,000 tons. Normally that's dead weight, designed with a ~ 4 to 1 safety margin, accounting for wind loads, live floor loads etc. Once the fire weakened the structure, one floor collapsed. Let's say it fell 12 feet, crushing everything weak (furniture, non load bearing walls etc) until it contacted the concrete, decelerating in the final 6 inches. That's a DYNAMIC load of a little over a million tons; 6 times what the structure was designed to withstand.

That assumes a dynamic load ratio of about 24x, or about twice what a stretchy rope will give you.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

On a climbing rope, for example, the dynamic load is generally around ten times the static load. The reason this is so _low_ (only ten times) is that the rope is designed to stretch to increase the amount of time that the load has to decelerate, thus limiting max deceleration (and the resulting amount of force needed.)

Another point to bring out in that comparison is "dynamic rope" vs "static rope". Dynamic rope has a spiral wound core that gives the rope its stretch and is used for fall protection by climbers, etc. Static rope, on the other hand, has its core strands running linear to the rope and parallel to each other. This is to limit the amount of stretch under load since more stretch makes the rope much more difficult to rappel on and ascend. As a result one should NEVER use static rope for fall protection. Even a relatively short fall could result in severe injury unless other means of absorbing the energy are in place (hitting the ground does not count).

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

How could could think the poster was implying anything of the sort? There was nothing in the post to even suggest such a conclusion.

Quote

Freefall would be constant acceleration at 1g until terminal velocity is achieved.

This is basically what he is saying, freefall can occur even if terminal velocity is not met.

This is probably not whet was intended to be said, but it is what was said.

He posted, "Freefall would be constant acceleration at 1g until terminal velocity is achieved." It isn't basically what he was saying, it is exactly what he was saying. He said nothing nor construed anything to suggest otherwise. To suggest he was trying to imply it is impossible for something to freefall unless it makes it to termianl velocity is ridiculous.

Rhys- this is a big part of why few people take you seriously anymore. The above sequence suggests a complete inability to understand English or basic physics.

freefall = constant acceleration of 32ft/s/s. But on Earth or any place with an atmosphere, this has an upper bound.

But your citation, the Harvey Mudd grad (a solid, if whacky college in Claremont), only said constant acceleration, did not assert it was 32ft/s/s.

So either your citation was incomplete (no, I'm not going to waste time reading your psuedo papers or watch youtube videos), or you misrepresented it.

[rhys 0]

Quote

I didn't compare a skyscraper to a hammer. I used it to illustrate one simple, but fundamental, misaprehension concerning the forces involved.

Why don't you explain that simple fundamental misrepresentaion buy refuting david chandlers comprehensive report, rather than comparing to a toe and a hammer.

I do not claim to be a scientist or an engineer.

I used the jenga blocks as a simple example of how the path of greatest resistance will alter the trajectory of a falling object.

very simple.

Your toe and hammer point proved nothing.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

I used the jenga blocks as a simple example of how the path of greatest resistance will alter the trajectory of a falling object.

You tried to say that a scyscraper should fall over because a jenga tower falls over. Which is ridiculous.

Quote

Your toe and hammer point proved nothing.

On the contrary, it explained the same concept as Billvon's last post, but in fewer words (and hopefully a badly broken foot for you, which would teach you to stop believing these frauds).

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[millertime24 8]

Quote

I used the jenga blocks as a simple example of how the path of greatest resistance will alter the trajectory of a falling object.

Ok, I'll bite. What would happen to a stack of Jenga blocks if you were to remove (hypothetically) an entire row of blocks simultaneously?

Muff #5048

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Your toe and hammer point proved nothing.

Did you actually perform that test????

I think we want to see the video proof..... you have a camera right???

JUst do the test as Jakee suggested.. but you have to get video...

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Why don't you explain that simple fundamental misrepresentaion buy refuting david chandlers comprehensive report

David Chandler has been disproven many times. You just ignore people when they disprove him.

Quote

I do not claim to be a scientist or an engineer.

Good. Then stop telling scientists and engineers they are wrong and your high school physics teacher, who doesn't understand physics, is right.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[skipbelt 0]

Quote

Quote

I didn't compare a skyscraper to a hammer. I used it to illustrate one simple, but fundamental, misaprehension concerning the forces involved.

Why don't you explain that simple fundamental misrepresentaion buy refuting david chandlers comprehensive report, rather than comparing to a toe and a hammer.
I do not claim to be a scientist or an engineer.
I used the jenga blocks as a simple example of how the path of greatest resistance will alter the trajectory of a falling object.
very simple.
Your toe and hammer point proved nothing.

what is the temperature of a turbine engines combustor components in a 757 at takeoff power ? just a ballpark estimate would suffice . this answer will shed light on the 500º estimate by the truthers. but the truthers won't like it.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Let's say it fell 12 feet, crushing everything weak (furniture, non load bearing walls etc) until it contacted the concrete, decelerating in the final 6 inches. That's a DYNAMIC load of a little over a million tons; 6 times what the structure was designed to withstand.

O.K. So you have clarified that according to your recollection or calculations there was a simultanious falure of all support allowing all the floors above the impact zone to fall (freefall?) as a solid block onto the lower floors resulting in a sudden jolt or impact causing the global collapse of the building/s.

Though there are probably several problems with that concept as fire damage is not symmetrical and this tyoe of falure is inprecedented, we will go on and look at what was actually observed and compare to your presented hypothesis.

Here is a peer reviewed journal on the subject.

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt4.pdf

As you will see if you watch the collapses and if you study the journal, this impact never happened.

Though you have pointed using out rough estimations the consequence of the upper floors impacting the lower floors, you have to have evidence that this actually happened as there is no evidence whatsover.

What evidence do you suggest there is for your hypothesis to be possible?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

You guys will have me believe a conspiracy is what nut jobs with tin foil hats beleive in

Nope-that hasn't been said. What has been said is the particular conspiracy theory that is the subject of this particular thread is what nut jobs in tin foil hats believe in.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Though there are probably several problems with that concept as fire damage is not symmetrical and this tyoe of falure is inprecedented, we will go on and look at what was actually observed and compare to your presented hypothesis.

Symmetrical collapse hasn't been claimed as I recall. In fact, the tipping of the upper portions as the collapse started shows that the initial failure wasn't symmetrical.

If that's all you have to go on, you might as well stop now.

Quote

Though you have pointed using out rough estimations the consequence of the upper floors impacting the lower floors, you have to have evidence that this actually happened as there is no evidence whatsover.

I'd say the empty spaces where the WTC stood is evidence enough that it did.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[skipbelt 0]

people with real tight grips on real empty bags resent it being brought to their attention !

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Though there are probably several problems with that concept as fire damage is not symmetrical and this tyoe of falure is inprecedented

Of course it's fucking unprecedented. How could it not be unprecedented?

When you have a unique skyscraper design married to a unique catastrophic accident where the fuck are you going to find precedent for what then occurs?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rhys 0]

Quote

Ok, I'll bite. What would happen to a stack of Jenga blocks if you were to remove (hypothetically) an entire row of blocks simultaneously?

have you ever succeded in doing that?

Typically the stack would fall through the path of least resistance which would not be straight down but to the side you removed the blocks from.

The action of removing them would likely be the catylist of collapse rather than the falling of the upper blocks.

I would prefer not to talk about jenga blocks, as I am sure without cognetive dissonance you all understand quite clearly what effect the path of greatest resistance has on collapsing objects.

By this emotional battle you all seem to have with rational thought is skewing your viewpoint.

I will only reply to posts that are pertenant to the subject of a falling skyscraper, not hammers nor wooden blocks etc. these are distractions from the subject at hand.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Ok, I'll bite. What would happen to a stack of Jenga blocks if you were to remove (hypothetically) an entire row of blocks simultaneously?

have you ever succeded in doing that?

Typically the stack would fall through the path of least resistance which would not be straight down but to the side you removed the blocks from.

The action of removing them would likely be the catylist of collapse rather than the falling of the upper blocks.

I would prefer not to talk about jenga blocks, as I am sure without cognetive dissonance you all understand quite clearly what effect the path of greatest resistance has on collapsing objects.

By this emotional battle you all seem to have with rational thought is skewing your viewpoint.

I will only reply to posts that are pertenant to the subject of a falling skyscraper, not hammers nor wooden blocks etc. these are distractions from the subject at hand.

Do you still believe the buildings did not fall through the path of least resistance?

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Of course it's fucking unprecedented. How could it not be unprecedented?

When you have a unique skyscraper design married to a unique catastrophic accident where the fuck are you going to find precedent for what then occurs?

Newtons 3rd law of momentum.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

Do you still believe the buildings did not fall through the path of least resistance? Unimpressed

They fell through 'what should have been' the path of greatest resistance, this reveals that pre planted explosives would have been necessary for what we observe to occur.

Coupled with extensive tangable evidence of these explosives and the documented history the NIST had in the development of the said explosives in the years leading up to the events, would usually be enough.

You seem quite happy to ignore this evidence, so you do not use the scientific method.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[skipbelt 0]

you seem to be ignoring other legitimate explanations for what you assert happened !

[rhys 0]

Quote

Symmetrical collapse hasn't been claimed as I recall. In fact, the tipping of the upper portions as the collapse started shows that the initial failure wasn't symmetrical.

Precisely which then renders Bills' calulation useless.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Symmetrical collapse hasn't been claimed as I recall. In fact, the tipping of the upper portions as the collapse started shows that the initial failure wasn't symmetrical.

Precisely which then renders Bills' calulation useless.

Um, no - Bill never claimed it was a symmetrical collapse.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[skipbelt 0]

Quote

Quote

Symmetrical collapse hasn't been claimed as I recall. In fact, the tipping of the upper portions as the collapse started shows that the initial failure wasn't symmetrical.

Precisely which then renders Bills' calulation useless.

did you mean calculation ? - spelling yank !

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

I would prefer not to talk about jenga blocks,

then you really shouldn't have ever brought them up. You don't get to just run away from the ridiculous things you say without admitting that they're ridiculous.

Quote

I will only reply to posts that are pertenant to the subject of a falling skyscraper, not hammers nor wooden blocks etc. these are distractions from the subject at hand.

So you admit that you hve been trying to distract people from the subject, and you have been pointing us towards 'experimnts' that are not pertinent to the subject.

This is, at least, a start.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Quote

Of course it's fucking unprecedented. How could it not be unprecedented?

When you have a unique skyscraper design married to a unique catastrophic accident where the fuck are you going to find precedent for what then occurs?

Newtons 3rd law of momentum.

Step 1: Find a dictionary.

Step 2: Look up 'precedent'.

Step 3: There is no step three.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?