keithprosser2 - 28 September 2011 06:36 AM

Oh,** I can think in terms of physics as well as anybody**, and better than most. But I haven’t seen your model or your calculations, so how do I know you haven’t overlooked something obvious? Have you had anyone qualified check your model and workings?

I am not swallowing the official line like some sheep, you know. ** My intuition is that if you fly an airliner into a skyscraper it’s not all that surprising if it collapse**s, at least not in hind-sight. I remember at the time being appalled by the suddenness of the collapse and its almost graceful fall. But it did not occur to me at the time it was due to anything other than damage from the collision. .

So your intuition told you WHAT about the distribution of steel and other mass down a skyscraper?

The concrete floor slab outside the core alone was 4 times the weight of the airliner. That does not count the weight of the pans and trusses holding the slab. I have never seen that weight specified. There were 84 identical standard floors in the building. Most of the other floors like the technical floors were even stronger and heavier. Of course the steel in the core and the perimeter columns had to be distributed to support the progressively increasing weight down the building.

The CN Tower most likely shows the kind of distribution for the support material.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBzLhy3Q7sY

But since the tower is not a building it does not have the constant added mass for the empty space and since it gets narrower at the top it would not have as much of a wind problem as the WTC.

Now my model enabled me to test paper loops to make them as weak as possible to support the static load. The washers provided the mass which would require acceleration from above in any top down collapse. Crushing the paper loops would require energy and the only source is the kinetic energy of the falling mass therefore it had to slow down to crush the loops. It takes 0.118 joules to crush a loop. The entire structure does not contain sufficient potential energy to crush all of the loops.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT4BXIpdIdo

Of course since we don’t have accurate data on the steel and concrete on every level of the WTC we can’t accurately compute the potantial energy of the towers. It is so curious that **qualified** people have not insisted on that information for TEN YEARS to do that calculation.

I would be most interested in seeing any model you could make where the components sustained damage in the collapse process. The cards in a house of cards collapse remain intact.

Now that **qualified** business brings up a very interesting issue after TEN YEARS. We are talking about a GRADE SCHOOL PHYSICS problem here so after TEN YEARS the **qualified** people certainly need to make this look difficult because they should have resolved it in 2002.

psik