WTC Collapses

.
.
Why don't you provide a link to a post of mine showing what supposed conspiracy theory I advocated?

Have I said the concrete is conspiring with the steel to keep information out of the NIST report?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

psik

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

While I have at times wondered if it really is necesarry to know these quantities of steel and concrete, I do agree with you on one thing- you're not so much interested in who did what, you just want to know what really happened and you want to have the data in order to determine this.

In a very real sense, I too have tried to focus my attention on what really happened, because providing factual arguments as to what physically happened in the various crime scenes is frequently much easier then proving who did it; the FBI never charged Bin Laden for a reason- they simply didn't have much evidence to go on. Now they seem to be charging some mentally challenged guy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Anyway, I digress- the point is I agree with psikey that we should try to focus more on what happened first; if we ever get beyond that, it will probably be much easier to persuade everyone as to who were the people who most likely did it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

At this point there is more than enough data to say we know it wasn't the aircraft impacts and the fires that took those buildings down. The crime was committed for political reasons and if there is no new investigation it will only be for political reasons also, not because there is a lack evidence and suspicion to warrant it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

.
Yep, nobody has done that.

There were actually a couple of times when I thought about doing something like that on the Dawkins site but it never happened.

I made a video and am working on a second, so enough already.

psik

 

.
But if the majority of people could understand the simple physics is there any way the politicians could not have an investigation.

Oh yeah, we can build 1360 foot skyscrapers without figuring out how much steel to put on every level.

ROFLMAO

So why hasn't every high school physics teacher in the country been pointing out something that obvious? 10,000 page report without the total amount of concrete. I thought we were supposed to shoot people that stupid in order to put them out of our misery.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

psik

 

Well..I have been trying to razz you psi...but that is because of your attitude. You attack anyone who responds to your posts, and treat those who try to discuss with you with disdain. There's an old saying "You can catch more flies with honey than with vinagar". Have you noticed the way that I respond to Scott? I at least try to show him some respect, even though we may disagree on pretty much everything in this thread.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Why? Because he responds to direct questions. (maybe a little too much

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

) and doesn't take an attack on his position as a personal attack.

I have seen in virtually every post you make your disgust at the fact that the total amount of steel and concrete were not listed in the NIST report. Time and time again you repeat this. I honest-to-goodness wanted to know why the hell this was so important to you, out of pure curiousity. My personal guess was that you had a theory that needed that data to be conclusive. I just wanted to hear what that theory was in a little more detail.

Here is the post that you directed me to, to explain your theory.

Can you expand on your conservation of momentum formula?

 

.
It is not my conservation of momentum formula. I have searched a little on the internet but have not found how old it is. It can't possibly be less than 300 years old but I would be surprised if it was not known before Newton.

http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/2cl/ch04/ch04.html

Object 1 hits object 2. Either they bounce apart like billiard balls or they stick together like a couple of pieces of clay. This is the formula if they stick together:

m1v1 + m2v2 = (m1 + m2)v3

m is mass and v is velocity. Now if the second mass is stationary then v2 equals ZERO and the formula becomes.

m1v1 = (m1 + m2)v3

This is what is being computed in my vertical collapses in FALL OF PHYSICS. If the 2 masses are equal then it is very easy, v3 will be half of v1. But for any other combination of masses just plug m1, m2 and v1 into the equation and compute. That is the easy part.

The problem is in FALL OF PHYSICS after each impact the combined mass will accelerate due to gravity to the next collision while it already has a starting velocity. This requires the quadratic formula to compute the time to the next collision and then the velocity at that collision. So the "Speed" lines list the velocities before and after each impact. But the alignment of the text in your quote does not show the way I put it using the CODE format.

I am not interested in catching flies. I assume I am communicating with people with functioning brains that want honest solutions to a problem until they demonstrate otherwise. If they believe a <200 ton airliner can total a >400,000 ton building then they should be able to defend that position on the basis of the physics. If they don't know enough about the physics to even question the plausibility that is not my fault and they should be honest enough with themselves to admit they don't know.

If you saw someone roll a tennis ball down a bowling alley and all 10 pins fell down wouldn't you think it peculiar and that there might be something else involved like threads attached to the pins or special pins with magnets and electromagnets under the floor. But to not even be told the amount of steel where the planes impacted is ridiculous.

psik

 

With you so far...

Sounds good.

And I'm lost...

Halfway to oz now...

And I'm already in oz

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

.

Going at warp speed for destinations unknown

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Maybe BenTheMan or Alphanumeric or Tony or Headspin perhaps, but this stuff is just way out there for me.

 

m1v1 + m2v2 = (m1 + m2)v3

Code:

.
             m1 * v1 + m2  *  v2 = (m1 + m2)  *  v3 
              ^    ^    ^      ^                  ^
              |    |    |      |                  |
 mass of   ---+    |    |      +-- velocity of    +-- velocity of
 object #1         |    |          object #2         combined mass
                   |    |
 velocity of  -----+    +--- mass of 
 object #1                   object #2

I am currently watching a video of the Manhattan Project. This 9/11 business looks so simple and petty by comparison.

psik

 

I'll help you out just a little bit here, since it's a matter of physics. Your calculations are ok, not that there's much that can go wrong here since you've made things as simple as they can possibly get. Just a note on your methodology- you can use \(t=\frac{v_f-v_i}{g}\) to calculate times, no need to solve a quadratic equation once you have initial and final velocities for each interval. The problem with your reasoning is that the model is garbage. The WTC is said to have been collapsing internally before the exterior gave in, so your model is irrelevant. Also the top 13 floors or whatever fell at the same time, so you'd have to add that in once you fixed the first problem. And the surface that is falling could plow through the surface beneath it without performing a sticking collision. If you want to do some accurate physics modelling of the problem, why don't you contact some students and faculty at an established university, who have constructed their own models, and ask them how they did it and where they got their numbers?

Skyscrapers aren't built like the pyramids. There are spatial considerations to take into account.

Hey I don't make the rules, although I admit I personally think the pseudoscience section is indeed the appropriate home for this thread. The only reason I dropped in is to let you know not to get cocky and start claiming scientific validation just because you're allowed to post this on a science forum.

 

Ok, I knew most of what the symbols stood for. The main problem is I don't know much about the formulas you're using.

I'm sure. Unfortunately, for someone who knows little concerning equations, they can seem equally daunting to the layman.

 

we also know it wasn't a bomb or explosives

good point.
it's hard to say what motivated those religious freaks.

 

Who is we?

 

the ones that know the story and looks at this objectively, that's who.

the people that buy into this "bomb" nonsense are overlooking two pieces of evidence that the conspiracy buffs have failed to provide.

 

.
So why can't these objectivists tell everybody the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level after SEVEN YEARS? Did the distributions change since the buildings were completed in the 70's? Surely that has nothing whatsoever to do with bombs.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

psik

 

Don't they teach kids nowadays?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

Incidentally, bring up the man himself he happened to stumble on another architectural problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa

Conclusion on that tower:
Men are not perfect, they make mistakes. While the structure might be sound the foundations of the tower weren't necessarily well planned.

In regards to other towers:
We can't expect every worker involved in the creation of a building to do things 100% accurately and this means no matter how much stress testing any building design goes through there will always be a margin for human error.

 

.
Well thank you kind sir I could not have done it without you. Take note of that MacGyver and Scott33x. LOL

.
I am astonished by your brilliance. It is so nice to know I didn't need the quadratic equation. But your equation depends on KNOWING THE FINAL VELOCITY. But when I started doing these calculations I didn't know the final velocity so how was I supposed to compute it without using the quadratic equation? Please enlighten me further?

.
Would you care to provide the source for this supposed internal collapse and explain why you believe it and what supposedly caused it? Does this apply to both the north and south towers? Are you sure this isn't some pseudo-science that only you REAL SCIENTISTS that don't need quadratic equations are capable of BELIEVING?

.
Oh, I get it. Physics only works at established universities and this is really just about keeping people believing in AUTHORITY not actually explaining things to people so they can understand it for themselves. It is just some 300 year old Newtonian physics after all and we all have computers and can download torrents of physics books. ROFL

.
There are a couple of skyscrapers that are built like pyramids though the one in Chicago is truncated. San Francisco always has to be more cool than Chicago.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Yeah that structural steel made it possible to eliminate thick walls on the lower levels of stone buildings to support all of that weight. But if you check Lon Waters' site you will find some columns had 20 times as much weight at the bottom as the top. So why don't you REAL SCIENTISTS want a table with the specs?

.
Now that is really hilarious. Talk about COCKY and then give us an equation that couldn't be used without information I already got from using the quadratic equation and then claim I didn't need it.

ROFLMAO

I think the people who claim that they know REAL SCIENCE are going to have to explain why they didn't solve a problem in SEVEN YEARS that should have been done in SIX MONTHS because they didn't point out the simple and necessary data.

You can't build skyscrapers without figuring out how much steel and concrete to put where before you even dig the holes for the foundations. The people putting up the money want decent cost estimates.

Definitely AUTHORITARIAN. That Authoritarian Science must be maintained and the LAYMEN must grovel in their benighted ignorance.

psik

PS - Was that a proper mixture of honey and vinegar MacGyver1968? You know I have such poor taste in that area.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

haven't you read anything about how the towers were constructed?
the box column dimensions have been published.
the floor plan is also known.
i would imagine that the perimeter tree columns are also known.
what's left to consider?

 

you put honey and vinegar on mcgyver?

 

Kinky