Hmmm…changing topics away from WTC7?
I can’t tell if you’re just trying to bait me into an argument, but your logic as it stands here is clearly flawed. It wasn’t the planes alone that brought the buildings down; there was also a raging fire due to the burning jet fuel. Saying that the buildings couldn’t have been brought down by the mass of such small planes is an extremely weak argument..
I thought the topic was neurotic conspiracy theorists.
But if the physics dictates that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the skyscrapers to have collapsed from the reported causes then who is neurotic?
Are you saying that physics worked differently on WTC7 than it did on WTC 1 & 2?
Actually I think WTC7 is so obviously a demolition that it is boring. The obvious give away is how the roof line came down so simultaneously and remained so straight all of the way across the building. How could damage from the “collapse” of WTC1 create such ideal behavior? How could fire do it? It’s ridiculous to think such random phenomenon could cause such a precise result.
At least airliners smashing into skyscrapers is interesting.
OH yeah jet fuel. Sometimes known as kerosene. There were 34 tons of it. FEMA says about 50% of it was used up in the initial explosion. But how much mass are we talking about in the vicinity of the impact? They never tell us how much a complete floor assembly weighed. But it is easy to compute the weight of a concrete floor slab on the basis of dimensions and density. One concrete slab outside the core weighed 600 tons. How much all of the trusses and corrugated pans weighed I have never seen. I am guessing around 200 tons. There were 236 perimeter columns and 47 core columns. But we are completely missing data on the horizontal beams in the core.
Now with each level 12 feet tall that means there were 564 feet of vertical steel in the core on each level. But the cores were 86 feet by 136 feet. Now the columns were not in an evenly spaced 6 by 8 grid with one missing. I have never seen the layout of the horizontal beams specified. But the length of horizontal steel should be about 8 * 86 + 6 * 136 or 1504 feet of steel. Much more than double the length of vertical steel. So how are we supposed to analyze whatever happened when we don’t even know the tons of steel on each level inside the core?
That is part of the absurdity of this business. Steven Jones and Richard Gage don’t even ask relevant questions to help resolve this issue. Everybody is supposed to be focused on emotional bullshit like conspiracy theories and controlled demolition which would have to be some kind of conspiracy.
But physics is incapable of caring about human motivations. An airliner is an inanimate object and so is a skyscraper. So if airliners could cause the complete destruction of the buildings in so little time then physicists should be able to thoroughly explain it with complete data on the towers. So why haven’t most been asking about the distribution of steel down the buildings for nearly TEN YEARS? Why isn’t it obvious to grade school kids that the data is important? Where is the SCIENTIFIC CURIOSITY of these supposed SCIENTISTS?
The distribution of the mass of steel is important for THREE REASONS:
#1 . Analyzing the airliner impacts. The NIST provides empirical data indicating the south tower deflected only 15 inches due to the impact. They provide a graph based on a digital camera showing the deflection and four minutes of oscillation. The distribution of mass of steel and concrete had to affect that. The supposed SCIENTIFIC simulation created by Purdue does not have the core columns moving which they had to do according to empirical data from the NIST.
#2. The south tower came down 54 minutes after impact and yet there had to be enough steel on the 81st level to support another 29 stories but we are not told how many tons of steel were there. So how did enough steel weaken enough for collapse to begin in that little time?
#3. A top down collapse means the falling upper portion must accelerate the stationary mass below while simultaneously destroying the supports underneath which held that mass for 28 years and due to Newton’s 3rd law the bottom of the falling mass must be crushed simultaneously thereby destroying itself while absorbing its own kinetic energy to perform that destruction. So it should slow down so how did all of this happen in less than 18 seconds.
I have two different models to demonstrate two phases of the event.
Sorry, I am not going to try to do the fire thing.