The Physics Of WTC 7

[KokomoJojo]

you don't know! thanks for admitting that!

if you knew you wouldnt have to ask now would you.

you gamaclown rocksforbains and ratinsack are the 4 runnerups for top tard who will be the queen for today?

another false statement...I never asked you to solve it. you said: "then want me to prove it for you."-kokojo
my reply: "if you do, it would be a first!"-daws

making this statement absolutely true: you don't know! thanks for admitting that!"-daws

quote it

 

[daws101]

you don't know! thanks for admitting that!

That's why Koko is on ignore for me. Never adds anything to the discussion and clutters the thread with useless pictures. Makes viewing this thread MUCH easier.

nope koko is on ignore with you because koko makes mincemeat out of your ass and like a few others you damn well know it!

you have such a rich fantasy life!

 

[daws101]

if you knew you wouldnt have to ask now would you.

you gamaclown rocksforbains and ratinsack are the 4 runnerups for top tard who will be the queen for today?

another false statement...I never asked you to solve it. you said: "then want me to prove it for you."-kokojo
my reply: "if you do, it would be a first!"-daws

making this statement absolutely true: you don't know! thanks for admitting that!"-daws

quote it

I already did..

 

[daws101]

"so you claim that newtonian physics do not apply"-kokojo

thats your claim asswipe

wrong! ye of the non working greymatter.
my statement was :Newtonian physics were not the only physics at play that day...daws
that statement is self explanatory

 

[KokomoJojo]

That's why Koko is on ignore for me. Never adds anything to the discussion and clutters the thread with useless pictures. Makes viewing this thread MUCH easier.

nope koko is on ignore with you because koko makes mincemeat out of your ass and like a few others you damn well know it!

you have such a rich fantasy life!

Yeh trougher tards are entertaining.

still cant validate not even ONE damn claim you made. idiot

 

[daws101]

nope koko is on ignore with you because koko makes mincemeat out of your ass and like a few others you damn well know it!

you have such a rich fantasy life!

Yeh trougher tards are entertaining.

still cant validate not even ONE damn claim you made. idiot

wrong! every statement I posted is valid.

 

[KokomoJojo]

"so you claim that newtonian physics do not apply"-kokojo

thats your claim asswipe

wrong! ye of the non working greymatter.
my statement was :Newtonian physics were not the only physics at play that day...daws
that statement is self explanatory

and ELC so graciously ponted out that there were several other forms of physics at play as well, such as, dawsian physics, gamaclown physics, rockhead physics, and ratshit physics at play.

You tards are so fucking



and a little slow too

 

[KokomoJojo]

another false statement...I never asked you to solve it. you said: "then want me to prove it for you."-kokojo
my reply: "if you do, it would be a first!"-daws

making this statement absolutely true: you don't know! thanks for admitting that!"-daws

quote it

I already did..

liar

 

[daws101]

thats your claim asswipe

wrong! ye of the non working greymatter.
my statement was :Newtonian physics were not the only physics at play that day...daws
that statement is self explanatory

and ELC so graciously ponted out that there were several other forms of physics at play as well, such as, dawsian physics, gamaclown physics, rockhead physics, and ratshit physics at play.

You tards are so fucking



and a little slow too

wow not even original...
the owning is not...

 

[daws101]

quote it

I already did..

liar

wrong! look for yourself ..but you won't

 

[KokomoJojo]

Well, that didn't take long. In answer to your question, I do want to explore it. We'd have to agree about the parameters first though (nothing complicated).... What say you?

You've already set the parameters!

In a race to ground, all naturally failing load bearing structures, to one degree or another, will prevent a load from falling as fast as a similar weight dropped from the same height at the same time falling through air.... There are no known exceptions.

Here is a failing structure.



Are you telling me that no matter how much that load increases, there is no chance for that column beneath it to EVER reach zero resistance?

And you keep avoiding my other question.

When the entire roofline started to descend, does that mean explosives were simultaneously set throughout the entire structure? I mean, the ENTIRE roofline across the building descended at the same time right?

That's a failing structure? Because I've been checking on it over the last couple of days. It looks pretty stressed out man, but it's holding.

This is a failing structure....

....and just like the other failing structure I posted....

....in a race to ground it will not be the same fall time for the falling load as it will be for a similar weight dropped from the same height at the same time falling through air.

All I'm saying is that naturally failing load bearing structures, to one degree or another, will always prevent a load from falling as fast as a similar weight dropped from the same height at the same time falling through air, and that there are no known exceptions.

Obviously, any structural component can reach a point where it no longer offers any resistance to the load above it. It happens all the time, either because of overloading (above) or damage to the load bearing structural component (below).... but it can't go into free fall unless/until structural failure is complete (bifurcation), which takes time. Only after bifurcation occurs can the load go into free fall since, as long as any part the column continues to offer any resistance, some of the falling load's potential energy will continue to be used for the purpose of overcoming it, so not all of its potential energy will be converted into motion, which is the definition of free fall....

For gravitational acceleration, all the potential energy of a falling object due to gravity must be converted to motion. It's that damn Newton guy again!

you dont honestly expect a rational response do you?

all these fuckers are doing is trolling they have nothing what so ever of value to contribute to the thread.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Today, 02:55 PM
Remove user from ignore list
KokomoJojo
This message is hidden because KokomoJojo is on your ignore list.

 

[E.L.C.]

So the time it takes for a structure to fail is dependent on how much of an increased load is applied to said structure AND how quickly said load is increased right?

Hmm.... Well, WTC 7 collapsed (alledgedly) due to fire weakened structural components, so I don't know what this ever increasing load thing is you're talking about. Are you using dawsian physics? Because that would explain it all quite nicely.... The load would spontaneously increase for no apparent reason, and then, in view of the fact that only Nikola Tesla really knew what science is, matter would have no trouble falling through matter at gravitational acceleration.

 

[Gamolon]

So the time it takes for a structure to fail is dependent on how much of an increased load is applied to said structure AND how quickly said load is increased right?

Hmm.... Well, WTC 7 collapsed (alledgedly) due to fire weakened structural components, so I don't know what this ever increasing load thing is you're talking about. Are you using dawsian physics? Because that would explain it all quite nicely.... The load would spontaneously increase for no apparent reason, and then, in view of the fact that only Nikola Tesla really knew what science is, matter would have no trouble falling through matter at gravitational acceleration.

Baby steps E.L.C., baby steps...

Let's say I have square, 10 floor structure with a column at each corner and one column in the middle. If I weaken the middle column on the first floor with fire so it begins to fail like in my diagram and the floors begin to sag, what happens to the load on the four corner columns? Does it increase at all?

 

[KokomoJojo]

So the time it takes for a structure to fail is dependent on how much of an increased load is applied to said structure AND how quickly said load is increased right?

Hmm.... Well, WTC 7 collapsed (alledgedly) due to fire weakened structural components, so I don't know what this ever increasing load thing is you're talking about. Are you using dawsian physics? Because that would explain it all quite nicely.... The load would spontaneously increase for no apparent reason, and then, in view of the fact that only Nikola Tesla really knew what science is, matter would have no trouble falling through matter at gravitational acceleration.

agreed

Here we can see dawsian physics at work; spontaneously increasing load and matter falling through matter





historically it happened before!

 

[KokomoJojo]

Baby steps E.L.C., baby steps...

Let's say I have square, 10 floor structure with a column at each corner and one column in the middle. If I weaken the middle column on the first floor with fire so it begins to fail like in my diagram and the floors begin to sag, what happens to the load on the four corner columns? Does it increase at all?

which weakens faster the floor steel or the vertical core steel?

meantime show me which core column was damaged.

 

[KokomoJojo]

of course none of that is wtc7 which nist claims a column slipped off the plate which is impossible because it was designed to account for it. NIST OOpsie!

 

[E.L.C.]

No one here has shown any substantial or compelling evidence/theory that would contradict David Chandler, or show any special exemption from physical principles.

Explain this one thing. E.L.C.

David Chandlers graph shows a BREAK in freefall (inside the blue oval). How do you explain that?

Who cares about David Chandler? His initial informal analysis was only an approximation looking at a Timex Watch or something, close enough to be an indicator (no cigars).

That was later enhanced and refined by the NIST, which conducted a formal pixel by pixel analysis (using individual pixels as reference points), and the NIST says the building came down at free fall for 2.25 seconds (105 feet). Their analysis is the final word man (cigars all around boys, light'em up!).... You want to argue with the NIST? Sure pal, go ahead, let me know how that works out for you.

Forget Chandler, the NIST like really rules dude!

Hey clown! When it comes to the
NIST, you just can't miss....
Don't be no free fall fool!!

​

 

[Faun]

then we agree the wtc buildings were demolished


World Trade Center on 9/11 - Sounds of Explosions - YouTube

what a NOOB

happy landing

What a pity for your sanity that none of those explosions can be proven to come from WTC7. And still, we have video and audio from when WTC7 actually collapsed ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN8d-Dy4Ut4"]911FILES WTC 7 Collapse compilation...rare videos with audio.. - YouTube[/ame]

... No explosions seen ... No explosions heard.

None. Conclusive proof the building was not brought down in a controlled demolition.

yup another retard post LMAO

The way is works is when you edit out the sound there is nothing, or if you edit yap mouth over the top there is yap mouth.

thats the way these things work.

Edit out the sound???



There were plenty of clips in there with sound. In one, a reporter is interviewing a woman with a child when WTC7 came down. There were no explosions. None whatsoever. None could be seen and none could be heard.

Hold fast to your delusions.

 

[KokomoJojo]

What a pity for your sanity that none of those explosions can be proven to come from WTC7. And still, we have video and audio from when WTC7 actually collapsed ...

911FILES WTC 7 Collapse compilation...rare videos with audio.. - YouTube

... No explosions seen ... No explosions heard.

None. Conclusive proof the building was not brought down in a controlled demolition.

yup another retard post LMAO

The way is works is when you edit out the sound there is nothing, or if you edit yap mouth over the top there is yap mouth.

thats the way these things work.

Edit out the sound???



There were plenty of clips in there with sound. In one, a reporter is interviewing a woman with a child when WTC7 came down. There were no explosions. None whatsoever. None could be seen and none could be heard.

Hold fast to your delusions.

yeh thats what you do when you want to tamper with the evidence. Its criminal. Its why this guy had to be eliminated.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI#t=95]Barry Jennings - 9/11 Early Afternoon ABC7 Interview - YouTube[/ame]

he was not in wtc 1

he was not in wtc 2

Where do you think he was?

He is dead now, just like the 30 year demolition vet who publically stated 7 was without question an explosive demolition.

and there are videos that have the sound, damned if I am stoopid enough to post it.