I just finished the whole comments section. Still not sure who’s leg is undergoing failure testing. 
You should. Stephen King’s Christine was a diabolical 1958 Plymouth, and who knows how evil they got after after the addition of pollution controls and safety features? Wait–I know how bad, since I drove a '74 Duster to and from Arizona. Pretty bad, indeed. :eek:
But its link to the quotes is real. Well, as real as a Truther site can be. I’ve seen people, including, I believe, one of our guests tonight, who claim that the trains heard through the ventilation grates over the subway were the sounds of the CD explosives. And some others have never grasped the concept of a metaphor and believe that when Firefighter Julian said, “…it sounded like a freight train,” he must have heard a freight train.
This site was directly making fun of the CTers who were saying “people said things sounded like a bomb going off so there must have been bombs going off!!!”
The south tower is 30 LEVELS falling the north tower is 14. The south tower tilted 20 to 25 degrees according to the NIST and 25 degrees according to Frank Greening and other sources. Therefore that tower has more issues than the Conservation of Momentum.
The north tower tilt is less than 5 degrees so that does not become an issue but it is only 14 LEVELS falling.
You can claim that I “fail to grasp” it all you want. The bottom LEVEL of the falling story would impact the top LEVEL of the stationary stories and they would collapse each other due to Newton’s Third Law. But those two collapses would require energy and the only sources would be the Kinetic Energy of the falling 14 LEVELS.
Yes the mass of the top LEVEL of the stationary portion would begin to accelerate downward and The Conservation of Momentume would come into play. So the falling portion would slow down for two reasons.
This process would repeat for the next two intact LEVELS. Therefore you have 14 LEVELS against 95 LEVELS. Who runs out first?
Where in the world did you get 600 tons? That is the weight of only the concrete floor slab. The steel pans and trusses were another 150 tons. That does not count the 5 inch concrete slabs inside the core and the horizontal beams in the core and the 12 feet of vertical steel for each of the 47 columns in the core plus the 236 columns with spandrels around the perimeter. That is why the weight is different on every LEVEL and the location of the center of mass of the tilted top portion of the south tower is not easy to determine. How much did the hat truss weigh?
Where is your data on the number of connections between the floor and the core and the perimeter? Waht have you got besides an assumption?
You said FLOOR not counting core and perimeter and got that wrong and don’t account for the energy required to break the floor loose even if the floor pancake phenomenon had not already been denied by the NIST.
Depending on your source the weight of the building was 400,000 or 500,000 tons. So if you include the six basements, which Frank Greening failed to do, that comes to 3,448 tons per LEVEL or 4,310 tons per LEVEL. But that is an average assuming every level had the same weight which I suspect is impossible for a skyscraper over 1,000 feet tall.
I was only pointing out that Popular Mechanics did not bring up the Conservation of Momentum. I was NOT saying that it was the only relevant factor or why it is relevant. The Conservation of Momentum had to affect the COLLAPSE TIME which you did not say anything about. This computer program:
http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=64306&sid=9b535eaa6870ca7e52824f466f0ba32c#64306
computes collapse time on the basis of gravitational acceleration retarded by the Conservation of Momentum without any loss due to breakage. With 109 equal masses spaced 12 feet apart the time is 11.9 seconds and increases to 14 if the masses are bottom heavy. But there are estimates of the collapse time of the north tower as low as 10 and 11 seconds and people do not demand accurate data on the mass distribution.
So why are you talking about the Conservation of Momentum if you are not computing the collapse time?
Arguing without even know your subject?
psik
I looked at the blueprints years ago.
It is so interesting that they show the locations of toilets and urinals but not the locations of the horizontal beams in the core that connected the columns. Interesting how people who believe in 30 second collapses don’t notice things like that.
What do they tell you about the weights of the perimeter wall panels down the buildings? There were only 2900 of them on each tower. According to a 1970 article the heaviest was 22 tons but the average weight had to be about 9. So how many different weights were there and what was the quantity of each grade?
Look at the blueprints and let us know.
psik
I was using 600 tons as a minimum weight for each FLOOR/LEVEL/FLAT THING/WHATEVER THE HELL YOU’RE CALLING IT. Why does that even matter. You’re the one that kept harping on CoM.
Or do I need to spell it in CAPITAL LETTERS to make it valid?
You claimed that the 80 lower FLOORS/LEVELS/FLAT THINGS/WHATEVER THE HELL YOU’RE CALLING THEM would have supported the falling FLOORS/LEVELS/FLAT THINGS/WHATEVER THE HELL YOU’RE CALLING THEM and brought them to a stop.
Post 371 of this thread.
posted by psikeyhackr
Good thing they didn’t build the towers out of this stuff. http://iphone.sciencealert.com.au/news/20142306-25723.html
Our friend’s brain would asplode.
Runs out? What runs out? It keeps adding more and more, falling on the floors below. You have 14 levels against 95 levels at first, then the 95th floor fails.
Then you have 15 levels against 94 levels, and the 94th floor fails.
Then you have 16 levels against 93 levels, and the 93rd floor fails…
…
Then you have 66 levels against 33 levels, and the 33rd floor fails…
…
Then you have 96 levels against 3 levels, and the third floor fails,
etc.
I can’t imagine what about this you’re pretending not to grasp.
But…but…but… 95 is MORE than 14, therefore I’m right.
And it’s LEVELS, not floors. sob
And that was explained to him by both tomndebb and myself. But it doesn’t matter, obviously.
I can. Fact.
Then you should have no trouble building a physical model that can collapse completely.
Make a video. Post it on YouTube and provide complete data so anyone can duplicate it.
What is the problem?
psik
Square-cube law.
A 1/100th scale model of the World Trade Towers (original version) would only weigh 1/1,00,000th of the actual building.
His arguments suggest that already happened.
We have posted Youtube videos of “models” with the exact same dimensions, structure, and materials collapsing. There were actually two of them, remember?
You’ve watched these videos and still don’t understand. So… what’s your problem?
Mostly, the problem is that you built an artifically sturdy “model” that did what you wanted it to do. We have no need of models because we have dozens of videos of the actual collapse along with enough education and intelligence to figure it out without playing with models.
We don’t need a model to recognize what happened and no model would actually persuade you.
Since models are so important to you, why do you not try to build a model that is genuinely AS WEAK AS POSSIBLE and video its collapse, (rather than relying on an inordinately strong model that demonstrates only your inability to design useful models).
Actually, you have 15 floors against ONE floor, which fails. Then you have 16 floors against one floor, which fails, etc. The 92 floors below it do not contribute to the equation until it’s their turn to fail.
There’s a whole branch of imaginary physics that says different. :rolleyes:
New theory, they collapsed from people repeatedly smacking their heads against them.