This post refers to the last statement in Cecil’s post: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_333.html
Here, it is basically said that some experts believe the common explanation of winds hitting the right frequency of this bridge is over simplified. But, isn’t this simply splitting hairs? The text below describes how the cables go slack making the bridge unstable. Ok, but what is the point of origin for this? Was the rbidge haunted? No, it was the wind swaying the bridge at just the right frequency, right? To me, it’s like arguing do guns actually kill, or is it really the bullets? The initial cause was the wind; the rest is purely academic, is it not?
Here is the exact text; I added the italics to catch your eye:
“Reader Wilbur Pan has alerted us to a recent report in Science News heaping abuse on this widely held view. Mathematicians Joseph McKenna and Alan Lazer doubt that a storm could produce the perfectly timed winds required. They’re working on a “non-linear” model of bridge behavior they hope will provide a better explanation. The main problem apparently is that when the roadway of a lightly constructed suspension bridge flexes, the cables supporting it go slack, introducing an element of unpredictability in which little causes (i.e., the wind) produce big results (i.e., a collapsing bridge). They hope to have the mathematical model describing this effect finished in five years–not the most aggressive schedule in the world, but apparently this is government work. You’ll read about it here first.”