And the weight, size and plumpness of each hotdog, what condiments were used and how fluffy the buns were! Plus the exact weight and volume of the water the dogs were boiling in, unless it was a grill, then we need the volume of gas, thickness of the propane tank, type of valve used, number of brackets and…
Man, we are going to need a LOT to really do this right!
African or European?
It’s a simple question of weight ratios!
Speaking about not talking about things, please provide your alternative hypothesis and evidence supporting it. Which, for some reason, you keep refusing to offer.
Made my day. 
I should point out something here that seems to be part of a communications issue with psikeyhackr, mostly his fault but whatever.
psikeyhackr demands that the collapse ‘be modeled’. Other folks (including me) have stated that it has been modeled.
However, strictly speaking that is not 100% true.
What has been modeled are all the events and conditions that lead up to the collapse. The models done by NIST and others cover everything right up until the collapse initiates. They stop after that.
Why? Because modelling a collapse is computationally impossible. There are simply far, far too many variables. It cannot be done. Even with supercomputers. I doubt it may ever be modeled in the future either - take note of how many variables come into play on a pool table just after the 2nd or 3rd collision. By the 6 or 7th you have to factor in the gravitational pull of the people around the table! Given the nearly infinite number of elements that come into play in such a collapse a model not going to happen.
Post point-of-disaster modeling is actually quite rare in engineering failure analysis. The most common examples being airplane or automobile disasters. Even those are often grossly oversimplified.
But more to the point, nobody beyond truthers cares. When you play a game of Jenga, you concern is with who pulled out the last piece before it collapsed (it was the cat)- they do not care how piece #23 bounced and ended up 4 feet from the coffee table.
Exactly. I thought all of that was clear, but perhaps it wasn’t. Not only that, you simply can’t input every single detail into a computer model even to model the event (in this case the initial collapse), since it would also overwhelm the ability of even a super computer to handle and process. So you simplify. You don’t NEED to know the exact volume and weight of the concrete as a series of discrete numbers distributed throughout the building, you simply need to know what the loading on the individual load bearing members and a wire frame model of the building itself, all easily available from the original plans and original engineering submission as well as the as built drawings and figures.
BTW, that cat is better at Jenga than I am. 
I can see the point, though. If you’re testing rollercoasters, how can you sit there and tell me a sandbag is an adequate model of the human body. It doesn’t have fluid vessels. The weight’s not distributed the same. There’s no reason to believe that rollercoaster should work the same with real live people. We should be using sheeple, instead. Open Your Eyes!
I think we need some live testing.
Anybody else getting hungry?
I’m starving. I wonder if they have apple smoked sheeple hot dogs yet? Man, that would be some good eating!
(of course, while I was writing that I kept hearing Atticus’s dog Oberon going on about SAUSAGES!!)
And then we’ll get psikey claiming it’s all inaccurate citing the lack of ketchup as proof.
Right…the Heinz/Hunts/Del Monte/Generic brand conundrum! The specific gravity of each brand is slightly different due to differences in ingredients, packaging and even printing (clerly there is more print on the Del Monte brand because there are more letters!). Heck, even the colors are slightly different! Damn, he’s right! We’ll never be able to nail this down!
Oh well, guess it really was fairly stealth ninjas using magical nano-thermite after all. :eek: Q.E.D. and all that…
I had a couple of Johnsonville Beef Brats™ while reading this thread and they’re sitting a bit heavy on my stomach.
Can anybody calculate why?
Hypothesis for what? Who did what and why? I don’t know and don’t care.
I am simply saying I do not buy the hypothesis that the top 13% of a 1300+ foot skyscraper could fall straight down and destroy the rest in less than 26 seconds. The lower portion had to have greater mass and strength all of the way down, otherwise it could not support itself and withstand the wind.
So why shouldn’t we be told the tons of steel and tons of concrete if we are supposed to support going to war as the result of this peculiar event? Was there anything about Pearl Harbor that defied any Laws of Physics?
psik
Then how could an alleged demolition at the same level work?
Take a wine glass and put it on a table. Balance another wine glass on top of it. Then balance a dictionary on top of the second wine glass. Might take a bit of effort to get it balanced right, but the bottom wine glass should support the weight. Now remove the middle wine glass, hold the dictionary above the bottom glass at about the same height it would be if the middle glass were still there, and drop it. The bottom wine glass, which could support the resting weight of the book, shatters when it’s hit by the book’s mass in movement.
This is, obviously, the case with the WTC. It was designed to support its own weight at rest, or under some relatively minor sheer stress from high winds. It was not designed to withstand millions of tons of concrete and steel being dropped on it, which is exactly what happened when the supports failed at the impact points.
First, glass is not concrete.
Do you know the actual mass of the glass and what’s the exact weight of the dictionary?
Is the dictionary of the English language or something foreign? I can’t accept results if it’s a foreign language because they use a different system of measurements over there.
Of course glass can’t stand up to millions of tons of concrete. Your example proves the conspiracy.
(I can do this shit!)
Let’s stop right there. The only things you seem to “question” and dispute are the official reports, so don’t even try to imply that you don’t care.
Can we please shoot this thread like a horse?
‘Middle school physics’ indeed…
ke = 1/2mv^2. A mass that has velocity has far more energy than one that’s stationary.
Let’s blow it up instead. Micro-thermite takes no time or effort to install, nobody will notice you installing it, and it leaves absolutely no traces behind.
I dispute the official reports when they contradict physics or do not supply enough data to test the physics.
Do we have to argue about whether or not every level of every skyscraper must be strong enough to support all of the weight above? Because if it does then why shouldn’t we know what the dead load was all of the way up? Didn’t they have to figure it out to design the buildings? 50 skyscrapers over 1000 ft tall have gone up since 9/11 and the Empire State Building is 83 years old so why should this be difficult information to get? It ain’t rocket science 45 years after the Moon landing. :smack:
Human beings can’t change physics therefore the physics should be resolved before any hunt for perps starts. If Arabs flying ariliners into them could do it then that should not be difficult to resolve from the physics either.
psik
I am honored
If a Jap Zero has a takeoff speed of 27 knots, how could they leave the back of the Akagi which was going away from Hawaii at 27 knots?!?1!??1!?