simple question for the WTC collapse

[candycorn]

Has he gotten to the part where he blames the Jews yet?

 

[eots]

Has he gotten to the part where he blames the Jews yet?

shouldn't you be off ranting about light post or something ?

 

[Derideo_Te]

stop with your substation bullshit..you are in contradiction with the NIST report

The FACTS about WTC 7 are not in dispute.

7 World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Image showing "bridge style" construction over the substation.

NIST Explanation for the collapse.

In November 2008, NIST released its final report on the causes of the collapse of 7 World Trade Center.[9] This followed NIST's August 21, 2008, draft report which included a period for public comments.[36] In its investigation, NIST utilized ANSYS to model events leading up to collapse initiation and LS-DYNA models to simulate the global response to the initiating events.[45] NIST determined that diesel fuel did not play an important role, nor did the structural damage from the collapse of the Twin Towers, nor did the transfer elements (trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs). But the lack of water to fight the fire was an important factor. The fires burned out of control during the afternoon, causing floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat, triggering the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled – pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.[9]

The fire that burned out of control caused the floors to expand and and push a key girder out of alignment. The loss of support resulted in a buckling and that was the trigger that brought down the entire building.

That scenario is entirely consistent with the plausible one that I have provided for the towers themselves.

Perhaps you might try enrolling in a basic applied mathematics course at your local community college.

That is WIKKI ..not the NIST report...what are you going to post next popular mechanics ?...NIST determined the substation was irrelevant to the collapse and the design of wtc 7 was never called into question ..engineers and physics professors with vastly more knowledge than your self find the NIST theory ludicrous are you suggesting they need to take a math class ?

So you are gullible enough to believe people who had no actual role to play in the investigations but you deny the findings of the qualified experts from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, the National Fire Protection Association, the American Institute of Steel Construction, the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat and the Structural Engineers Association of New York?

At this point it is more than apparent that you lack the knowledge necessary to comprehend the contents of the original NIST report. Hardly surprising since it deals with engineering concepts that you have probably never even heard of let alone understand.

Like the vast bulk of conspiracy theorists you base your position on questions that you are incapable of ever grasping the answers to. You have been supplied with plausible explanations based upon all of the known facts and yet you still prefer your own baseless paranoid version of events. There is no further point is trying to enlighten those that prefer the irrational and illogical over and above the hard factual evidence on hand. Have a nice day.

 

[eots]

Oh I see ,So in your opinion Einstein..peer review should only be done by those directly involved in the work ?

 

[Derideo_Te]

A 10-lb sledge hammer dropping 1 story or 10-ft creates a force of 10,000-lbs. That is 1,000 times the force the it took just to hold the hammer static in the air. The same goes for the building. The tower was built to hold less than 20 times its static downward force load at a given height. Now dropping a portion of the building 10-ft increased the downward force by 1,000 times. The aircraft took out 3 floors, So that initial collapse impact was likely after a 30 foot drop.

On top of that for every crushed floor the moving mass gained weight & mass. This kept on increasing the force as the building fell. So a building built to hold 20 times it's weight will give very little resistance to slow a force of 1,000 times it's weight.

A one pound hammer can dent 60,000 psi steel because it hits with a force greater than 60,000 psi.

A hammer is a force amplifier that works by converting mechanical work into kinetic energy and back.

In the swing that precedes each blow, a certain amount of kinetic energy gets stored in the hammer's head, equal to the length D of the swing times the force f produced by the muscles of the arm and by gravity. When the hammer strikes, the head gets stopped by an opposite force coming from the target; which is equal and opposite to the force applied by the head to the target. If the target is a hard and heavy object, or if it is resting on some sort of anvil, the head can travel only a very short distance d before stopping. Since the stopping force F times that distance must be equal to the head's kinetic energy, it follows that F will be much greater than the original driving force f — roughly, by a factor D/d. In this way, great strength is not needed to produce a force strong enough to bend steel, or crack the hardest stone.

Effect of the head's mass - The amount of energy delivered to the target by the hammer-blow is equivalent to one half the mass of the head times the square of the head's speed at the time of impact (E={mv^2 \over 2}). While the energy delivered to the target increases linearly with mass, it increases quadratically with the speed.

there was no pancaking the top half was already disintegrating as it fell and much of the debris and pulverized concrete was projected outward so it could not have gained weight & mass with every crushed floor. the moving mass there was met with a huge solid structure that would of offered a lot of resistance

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tejFUDlV81w]9/11 Experiments: Newton vs. NIST - YouTube[/ame]

Concrete DUST was blown outwards but it did not come even remotely close to the weight of the steel floors that were collapsing onto each other.

 

[eots]

pulverized concrete and large steel beams where projected outward

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHnLlwqiu0A]High Speed Massive Projectiles from the WTC on 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIkLOMZnkwM]WTC SOUTH TOWER: 1) SMOKING GUNS; 2) SMOKING GUNS (FOLLOW-UP); 3) EXPLODING PROJECTILE - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Derideo_Te]

Oh I see ,So in your opinion Einstein..peer review should only be done by those directly involved in the work ?

Peer review only matters when it is done by COMPETENT and QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL peers.

 

[Derideo_Te]

pulverized concrete and large steel beams where projected outward

What percentage of the steel and concrete was "projected outward"?

 

[Derideo_Te]

WTC SOUTH TOWER: 1) SMOKING GUNS; 2) SMOKING GUNS (FOLLOW-UP); 3) EXPLODING PROJECTILE - YouTube

Obviously no one capable of critical thought has been allowed to critique the inane assumptions in that video. The objects at the bottom are accelerating under the force of gravity. The objects on the top of the building would have been AC units and water containers. Once they came loose they would have sprayed whatever liquids they contained out behind them. The sunlight reflections explain the "secondary explosions". The gravitational stresses on the upper portion of the tower plus whatever portions of the curtain wall were still attached are what caused it to disintegrate. You are only seeing what the narrator is telling you to see as opposed to what is actually happening.

 

[Gamolon]

pulverized concrete and large steel beams where projected outward

Projected by what eots? Explosives?

 

[Gamolon]

pulverized concrete and large steel beams where projected outward

Which steel beams eots? Perimeter sections, core columns, horizontal beams, or all three?

 

[Gamolon]

High Speed Massive Projectiles from the WTC on 9/11 - YouTube

Whoo boy! 56 mph per a FREEFALLING perimeter section in a parabolic trajectory! There's a smoking gun!

You think some sort of "energy" was expelled for the perimeter section to reach that speed or do you think it could have reached that speed on it's due to gravity?

 

[Gamolon]

there was no pancaking the top half was already disintegrating as it fell and much of the debris and pulverized concrete was projected outward so it could not have gained weight & mass with every crushed floor.

Wrong again.

Can you explain, if most of the debris was projected outward, why there was about a 56' high pile of debris in the footprints?

the moving mass there was met with a huge solid structure that would of offered a lot of resistance

Instead of spouting garbage you THINK is true, how about show us. Explain how the descending mass should have been stopped by the lower structure? Show us some math eots. Please show how all the CONNECTIONS for the first floor impacted would have resisted the load.

 

[Derideo_Te]

pulverized concrete and large steel beams where projected outward

Which steel beams eots? Perimeter sections, core columns, horizontal beams, or all three?

How about wing sections, aircraft doors, water tanks, fire extinguishers, cubicle walls, door panels, window panes, desktops, etc, etc?

 

[Gamolon]

pulverized concrete and large steel beams where projected outward

Yup. Nothing in the footprint...

 

[Derideo_Te]

High Speed Massive Projectiles from the WTC on 9/11 - YouTube

Whoo boy! 56 mph per a FREEFALLING perimeter section in a parabolic trajectory! There's a smoking gun!

You think some sort of "energy" was expelled for the perimeter section to reach that speed or do you think it could have reached that speed on it's due to gravity?

Of course there is no mention of the missing shock wave energy that accompanies every explosion.

 

[Gamolon]

High Speed Massive Projectiles from the WTC on 9/11 - YouTube

Whoo boy! 56 mph per a FREEFALLING perimeter section in a parabolic trajectory! There's a smoking gun!

You think some sort of "energy" was expelled for the perimeter section to reach that speed or do you think it could have reached that speed on it's due to gravity?

Of course there is no mention of the missing shock wave energy that accompanies every explosion.

It's just sheer stupidity!

 

[Gamolon]

I still want eots to explain the explosion-less demolition of the building I pointed in the video I posted.

According to truthers, there is s Factor of Safety built into every structure. Meaning they believe that you can remove a percentage of structural components which reduces the Factor of Safety by the same percentage. They believe that as long as the Factor of Safety remains above one, the structure remains intact. No matter WHERE you remove components.

Truthers also believe that if the lower structure is able to support the upper structure, that means that if the upper structure falls upon the lower, it should resist. Why? Because it was able to support it previously.

So eots, Days, TakeAStepBack, please explain how you understanding of physics and FOS pertains to that building I asked you about at 3:22 in the previous video?

How did the upper section demolish the WHOLE structure by gravity alone?

According to you, that shouldn't be possible.