FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Robot Planes
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 - The Verdict Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krammer wrote:
If Fintan's theory that the angle of attack by the planes was the key factor in triggering the pancake collapse of the twin towers is correct, then it follows that building seven probably did collapse due to structural damage. The lack of cutter charge sounds in any of the broadcast audio or video precludes controlled demolition in my opinion. Although WTC 7 sure looks like a controlled demolition, pre-wiring an occupied office building with explosives does not seem to be a workable theory.


I think the physics of skyscrapers makes collapse IMPOSSIBLE.

My Python program that runs only on the conservation of momentum with no physical supports takes 12 seconds to collapse. That is with the top mass hitting the lower masses and starting them falling. On various sites I have seen estimates of 8 and 10 seconds for the collapse time of the north tower. Dr. Sunder of the NIST says 11 seconds.

A skyscraper has to hold itself up. To get a collapse time of less than 12 seconds means NO RESISTANCE. Resistance should have definitely meant more than 18 seconds which would be 50% of free fall acceleration.

9/11 is the Piltdown Man incident of the 21st century.

It is an embarrassment to all of the people who claim to understand physics. It is somewhat curious all of the people who claim to know physics and talk about the collapse and then say nothing about the REALLY INTERESTING fact of the speed of that collapse. I would think anyone with SCIENTIFIC curiosity would be all over it. At least that is how scientists were portrayed when I was a kid.

Now they are more pompous and AUTHORITATIVE. [1764]

psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krammer



Joined: 22 Jun 2006
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

psikeyhackr wrote:
krammer wrote:
If Fintan's theory that the angle of attack by the planes was the key factor in triggering the pancake collapse of the twin towers is correct, then it follows that building seven probably did collapse due to structural damage. The lack of cutter charge sounds in any of the broadcast audio or video precludes controlled demolition in my opinion. Although WTC 7 sure looks like a controlled demolition, pre-wiring an occupied office building with explosives does not seem to be a workable theory.


I think the physics of skyscrapers makes collapse IMPOSSIBLE.

My Python program that runs only on the conservation of momentum with no physical supports takes 12 seconds to collapse. That is with the top mass hitting the lower masses and starting them falling. On various sites I have seen estimates of 8 and 10 seconds for the collapse time of the north tower. Dr. Sunder of the NIST says 11 seconds.

A skyscraper has to hold itself up. To get a collapse time of less than 12 seconds means NO RESISTANCE. Resistance should have definitely meant more than 18 seconds which would be 50% of free fall acceleration.

9/11 is the Piltdown Man incident of the 21st century.

It is an embarrassment to all of the people who claim to understand physics. It is somewhat curious all of the people who claim to know physics and talk about the collapse and then say nothing about the REALLY INTERESTING fact of the speed of that collapse. I would think anyone with SCIENTIFIC curiosity would be all over it. At least that is how scientists were portrayed when I was a kid.

Now they are more pompous and AUTHORITATIVE. [1764]

psik


You are taking NIST out of context. Here is what they really say:
Quote:

NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NCSTAR 1-5A).

As documented in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, these collapse times show that:

the structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass at and above the impact zone. The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that energy through energy of deformation.

Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos. As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.

In other words, the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. The downward momentum felt by each successive lower floor was even larger due to the increasing mass.

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse.Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.


The 11 and 9 second times are for the first exterior panels to hit the ground based on seismic records. This is not the same as total collapse completion.

Accurate determination of the total collapse time is not completely reliable, but suffice it to say it was longer than you claim.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
psikeyhackr



Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is Dr. Sunder Dunderhead in his own words.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/cons-flash.html

[1779]
psik

_________________
Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 physics is history
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
telstar



Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Posts: 6
Location: Darlington,Co.Durham

PostPosted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes there is so many wholes in the official reports it's just unbelievable, it was such an evil fiasco from start to finish, I don't think they expected so much indepth inquiery by people with the exerpertise that has been employed in finding the truth.

We are all indebted to them all.

_________________
Don't walk infront of me for I may not follow,
Don't walk behind me for I may not lead,
Just walk by my side and be my friend.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 - The Verdict Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.