5 of 23
5
Inside Job—9/11 Truth and other 9/11 Discussion (Merged)
Posted: 20 December 2007 07:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 61 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

Eureka!  Well almost???

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch1.pdf

Although page 9 has a map with X’s on the Winter Garden, searches on the words “ton” and “tons” gave no hits.  So large components are pointed out but apparently there is no info about their weights. 

Now wait a minute.

You write a report with X marks the spots.

“Hey there’s big chunks of WTC right here.”

And then you don’t say the weight of the material.

This makes sense???

The wall elements weight 22 tons each

3. 22 ton outer wall steel sections ejected 200 meters into the winter garden.

http://verdade.no.sapo.pt/destruction/finnish_military_expert_hydrogen_bomb.htm

There must be at least 12 different wall elements (wall panels).  I don’t know which he is referring to.  The lightest would have the 35 ksi steel.  The heaviest would be 100 ksi.

3. quick math tells me it requires roughly 3.6 kg of TNT to throw 22 tons of anything at around 80 fps, which is how fast it would have to go to reach 200m in about 7.5 sec.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread228307/pg3

PROVEN ! Chemical Analysis proves conclusively that thermate (a patented controlled-demolition explosive) had been used in all 3 buildings which collapsed on 9/11/01. Many Scientists have run these tests of the debris and dust. The evidence is unimpeachable.

Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr confirmed that the WTC steel had been subjected to a eutectic reaction, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese:
“A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges—which are curled like a paper scroll—have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes—some larger than a silver dollar—let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending—but not holes.”

Journal of 9/11 Studies
http://www.journalof911studies.com
Peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal covering research related to 9/11/2001


http://www.trumanindex.com/messageboard/index.cfm?event=viewtopic&umessage_id=525cc9a6-6863-451f-8d7a-afa93f64ad97


Results 211 - 215 of 215 for +wtc +steel +(ejected, thrown) +distance +nist

I found no .gov sites in that list about the WTC.

Results 61 - 70 of about 370 for +wtc +steel +(ejected, thrown) +distance +tons +FEMA

Results 1 - 10 of about 1,080 for +wtc +steel +(ejected, thrown) +distance.

Results 1 - 10 of about 580 for +wtc +steel +(ejected, thrown) +distance +tons

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 December 2007 07:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 62 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4860
Joined  2007-10-05

This is BS. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You have failed to supply any evidence. All you’re arguing is the old “God in the Gaps” crap.

Please explain how the buildings came down according to your conspiracy hypothesis.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2007 02:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 63 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

Are posts being deleted here?

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 January 2008 05:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 64 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

So where were we before that rude interruption by the holidays and that agent of the Illuminati?

You can do a search of this site to see what I say about conspiracies.  Here is an example:

Then you wonder why the people you accuse of being “conspiracy theorists” won’t go away.  I don’t give a damn about any conspiracies.  Physics that does not make sense just doesn’t make sense.  You have to close your eyes and turn off your brain and do no research to not notice this nonsense.

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewreply/27382/


The airliner weighed less than 200 tons.  The south tower was more than 400,000 tons.  Yeah I know it had 34 tons of fuel and was going 500 mph.  But the building stopped it pretty fast, didn’t it?  And most of the fuel exploded outside of the building, didn’t it?  To believe that the plane could level that building in less than an hour and not even ask how many tons of steel were on the levels where the impact occurred is pretty hilarious.  There had to be enough steel on the 81st floor to support another 29 levels.


Why wouldn’t you want to know exactly how much to accept that it could be weakened by fire in 56 minutes?  Didn’t the designers have to figure that out in the 60’s.  You don’t find it odd not to have heard that in SIX YEARS?  What kind of scientific attitude is that for people claiming to be a Center For Inquiry?  LOL

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 January 2008 05:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 65 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4860
Joined  2007-10-05

I seriously doubt the people who designed the WTC towers in the 1960s considered the possibility of terrorists flying hijacked airliners into the buildings. This discussion has grown rather tiresome. Metal softens as it heats. Soft metal cannot support as much weight as cold metal. There was no conspiracy outside al Queda.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 January 2008 08:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 66 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05
fotobits - 06 January 2008 05:50 PM

I seriously doubt the people who designed the WTC towers in the 1960s considered the possibility of terrorists flying hijacked airliners into the buildings.

What does that have to do with the quantity and distribution of steel required for the building to support its own weight and withstand 150 mph winds?

Metal softens as it heats. Soft metal cannot support as much weight as cold metal. There was no conspiracy outside al Queda.

I’m not talking about a conspiracy.  You are talking about heated metal weakening so you are pretending you know something about physics.  Doesn’t it take more time and energy to heat and weaken greater quantities of metal?  So why aren’t you asking how much steel was on the impact floors?

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=35255#35255

psik

[ Edited: 08 January 2008 08:46 AM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 January 2008 08:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 67 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4860
Joined  2007-10-05

You are talking about heated metal weakening so you are pretending you know something about physics.

Nice ad hominem attack there. I’m not pretending anything. We had show horses when I was growing up, and I watched farriers make horseshoes many times. And, fwiw, I do know a bit about physics.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 January 2008 12:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 68 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Similarly, I’m familiar with chemistry, physics, and to a degree, metallurgy.  First, tall buildings are designed to have only a moderate safety factor to avoid excess cost and weight.  Second, damaging a good part of the structure physically transfers a great deal of the stress to the remaining structure.  Third, heating and softening only one or two of the remaining beams could easily shift even more of the unbalanced stess to the remaining beams causing them to bend, and that’s the end of the whole building.

Occam

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 January 2008 09:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 69 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

Nice ad hominem attack there.

You can call it ad hominem all you like but the Latin doesn’t demonstrate much either.

Weakening steel columns that must have been thick enough to support 30 stories of a building by heating them is going to take a significant amount of energy.  The NIST doesn’t even tell us how much steel was on the 81st floor of the south tower where the plane hit.  So if you are going to come into a thread discussing the subject you should have more to say than vague imprecise generalities six years after the fact.

And that doesn’t even raise the issue of how the falling mass crushed 75 stories below and magically stayed centered all of the way down.

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

If only he could spell.  LOL

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 January 2008 09:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 70 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05
Occam - 08 January 2008 12:30 PM

Similarly, I’m familiar with chemistry, physics, and to a degree, metallurgy.  First, tall buildings are designed to have only a moderate safety factor to avoid excess cost and weight.  Second, damaging a good part of the structure physically transfers a great deal of the stress to the remaining structure.  Third, heating and softening only one or two of the remaining beams could easily shift even more of the unbalanced stess to the remaining beams causing them to bend, and that’s the end of the whole building.

Occam

I’ll start looking for all of the places that say the WTC had more than MODERATE safety factors later.

The side of the WTC was 200 feet by 1360 feet.  So how much force would a 150 mph wind put against that?

Here is some physics and chemistry to chew on:

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/wtc/how-hot.htm

psik

[ Edited: 09 January 2008 09:56 AM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 January 2008 01:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 71 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

It is certainly curious how you find such a mixture of accurate and inaccurate information about 9/11.

It was found that the impact of the aircraft imparted a massive lateral force, severing numerous perimeter columns. Because of the structures’ redundancy, this event alone did not doom the towers. The ensuing blaze, fueled by the nearly full 10,000 gallon jetliner fuel tank and the building’s flammable contents, began to heat the structural systems. The report attributed the presumed floor failures to weakening of the joint connections between the trusses of the burning floors and the perpendicular columns. Once one floor started to fall, so, too, did the above levels. This triggered a “pancaking” of the floors below, disconnecting and slamming them straight down as though they were in free fall.

http://www.unlvrebelyell.com/article/2006/09/14/rebel-science-the-fall-of-the-world-trade-center-towers/

This site seemed pretty good even though they apparently think the planes brought the buildings down.

But then they say:

“The ensuing blaze, fueled by the nearly full 10,000 gallon jetliner fuel tank”

Saying the tanks were nearly full sounds impressive but a little research will show that the maximum fuel load for the planes was 23,000 gallons so they were less than half full.  How could they get the quantity of fuel correct and the size of the tanks wrong?  The airlines don’t waste money flying unnecessary fuel around the planet.  The planes have enough fuel to reach their destination plus a safety margin.  They don’t fly with nearly full tanks.

psik

[ Edited: 13 January 2008 10:43 PM by psikeyhackr ]
 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2008 03:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 72 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2008-01-15

“Humans are patterns-seeking mammals, who prefer a conspiracy theory to no theory at all.”  -Christopher Hitchens

 Signature 

“Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.” -William of Occam (1285-1347/9)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2008 04:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 73 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05
Canaximander - 16 January 2008 03:12 PM

“Humans are patterns-seeking mammals, who prefer a conspiracy theory to no theory at all.”  -Christopher Hitchens

There had to be some kind of pattern to the distribution of steel in the WTC towers.

Why don’t you get Christopher Hitchens to tell us what it was?

Do you think you can just throw steel together any which way and make a 110 story building stand up to a 100 mph wind?

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2008 07:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 74 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

The NIST NCSTAR1 report can be extremely amusing at times if you can stomach it.  One of the most astounding events of 9/11 was the top of the south tower tilting before coming down and disappearing in a dense cloud of dust.  So I figured any discussion of that occurence had to refer to either the “center of mass” or “center of gravity” of at least 25 stories of the building.  So I searched my DVD download of the report to see what turned up.  Definitely not what I expected.

Center of mass is only used 4 times and the only real object it references is the airplane.  It appears that they were extremely concerned about ceiling tiles and devoted an entire report to them.  The only Interesting thing about it that I can tell is that the plane decelerated at 60 g’s and came to a stop in 0.63 seconds.  Suspended ceilings must be of major concern in the collapse of a 500.000 ton building.


NCSTAR 1-5D Ceilings.doc   (offset 34)
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5D.pdf
Reaction of Ceiling Tile Systems to Shocks

center of mass   page 77(*3)

Some of the airplane debris would not likely have traveled this far into the tower, while some parts of the plane and some of the fuel passed through the building and exited the far side. It was, therefore, assumed that the center of mass of the airplane penetrated slightly more than one-half of the tower’s depth. Assuming that the center of mass of the airplane is located at approximately the center of its length, the center of mass of the airplane would have traveled approximately 197 ft (60 m) between when the nose impacted the face of the tower and when the airplane remnants came to rest.

center of mass   page 79

where, x p (t ) was the position of the center of mass of the airplane at time t. Given the initial and final velocities of the airplane and the differential displacement, described above, Equations 2–3 and 2–4 were solved to determine the acceleration parameters. The estimated peak acceleration of the airplane was found to be –62g (–610 m/s2), and the estimated duration of the impact was found to be 0.63 s. The resulting acceleration history is shown in Fig. 2–45.

They don’t use the term “center of gravity” in relation to any real physical object from 9/11.  They only use it in explaining how they configured their simulation software in specifying columns for the simulator.  I find this truly amazing for a 11,305 page report that took 3 years.  I guess the centers of mass and gravity don’t matter for the tons of material that was hurled hundreds of feet from the buildings.

NCSTAR 1-6.doc     (offset 82)
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-6.pdf
Structural Fire Response and Probable Collapse Sequence of the
World Trade Center Towers

center of gravity page 182

Shell elements were used to model the plates comprising the box column and the spandrels. Rigid elements connected the center of gravity of the column to its component plates and the spandrel at both the top and the bottom of the model. The column was simply supported in three directions at the bottom and simply supported in the horizontal directions at the top. Increments of axial displacement were applied at the top of the model.

center of gravity p186

In the ANSYS panel model, beam elements replaced shell elements to model the columns, while shell elements were used to model the spandrels, and beam elements attached the center of gravity of the columns to the mid-plane of its corresponding spandrel component at each shell element through the depth of the spandrel.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

NCSTAR 1-6C.doc     (offset 48)
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-6C.pdf
Component, Connection, and Subsystem Structural Analysis

center of gravity page 44

Four-node finite strain shell elements were used to model the plates of the column and the spandrels. Nodes of column plates at the top and the bottom of the model were rigidly tied to the center of gravity of the column cross section. The column was pinned at the bottom and fixed in the two horizontal directions at the top. Increments of axial displacement were applied at the top of the model at room temperature and 700 ̊C.

center of gravity   page 216

The model also represented Column 151 from Floor 96 to Floor 97 since the dimensions, plate thicknesses, and material properties were identical to those of Column 151 from Floor 95 to 96.  SHELL181 plate elements modeled the plates of columns and spandrels. CERIG rigid elements connected the center of gravity of the column to its component plates and to the spandrel at both the top and the bottom of the model. The column was pinned at the bottom and restrained in the two horizontal directions at the top. Axial displacement was applied incrementally at the top of the model.

center of gravity page 222

To capture the gravity load effects from upper floors (those above Floor 99), internal forces and moments at midheight of the columns between Floors 99 and 100 in the LERA SAP2000 global model, caused by dead plus 25 percent of design live load, were applied as loads at the tops of the corresponding columns in the exterior wall model at the center of gravity of the columns. To capture the gravity load effects from individual floors, floor loads were extracted from the LERA SAP2000 floor model and applied to each column.

center of gravity page 222

For columns that were modeled by BEAM189 elements, temperatures were provided for nodes at the center of gravity of the column, and their linear gradients transverse to the exterior wall were also provided. Gradients parallel to the wall were found to be negligible. Temperatures for SHELL181 elements were provided at each node. NIST did not always provide temperatures for the bolts at column splices. When bolt temperatures were provided, they matched temperatures at the nearest interior or exterior tips of columns.

All of the page numbers refer to the PDF pages, not the official NIST page numbers.  Doing searches in Adobe reports the PDF numbers.  I specified the offset for each report so the NIST page numbers can be computed.  Just subtract the offset from the PDF page to get the official government sanctioned, approved and certified page number.

Since for some reason our brilliant government officials locked this PDF document, even though taxpayers payed for it, it is impossible to cut and paste from it with Adobe.  But never fear, I was able to cut and paste from it with the Linux Evince document viewer.

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2008 07:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 75 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4860
Joined  2007-10-05

That’s a whole lot of words psikeyhacker, but just what exactly was your point?

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
   
5 of 23
5
 
‹‹ Eveyone a humanist?      Your Work and You ››