# Who cares to debate the events of 9/11/2001 based upon the laws of physics? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2017, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861 "2017-10-14T21:40:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/461 "2017-10-16T04:55:36Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > This post comprises my statement that I witnessed a plane strike the south tower. please tell me more, I’m interested, where were you? ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/462 "2017-10-16T04:57:06Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You have evidence that the dozens of videos, by random persons throughout Manhattan, Brooklyn Heights, and New Jersey ALL were faked and no one has happened to step up and mention that their film was not real in over 16 years? incredulity about what may or may not have been kept secret in no way negates the laws of physics. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/463 "2017-10-16T04:57:26Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > so you claim that a suitcase traveling at 540 mph is guaranteed to penetrate a steel box column wall by its inertia alone and never-mind its lack of structural integrity … This sort of disingenuous misstatement of another poster’s submission is liable to get you branded a troll and banned. No one claimed that luggage would “penetrate a steel box column wall.” The statement is that the airplane and all its contents were forced through the holes that the plane created in the walls that you claim could not be penetrated (while failing to provide any evidence to support your claim). [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/464 "2017-10-16T04:58:54Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > Very simple, the ones that allege to show the south wall of the south tower as its being penetrated ( allegedly ) by an airliner. > there are a lot of the various videos, most of them show the result of the alleged impact however the south wall is not visible, because its blocked by another skyscraper or the view is of the north side of the south tower. > > the ones to be very concerned about show the south wall of the south tower, however show a fake image of an airliner and this is where people go off, you see its possible to KNOW that something is an illusion without needing to explain HOW said illusion was done. The bottom line here is that commercial airliners simply do NOT penetrate walls in the manner shown in the video. look at the multitude of pix available on the web of airliners that have struck birds in flight, dents in the wings & nose of these aircraft caused by aprox 1 kg of bird… and people think that the aircraft would easily breach a wall made of structural steel box columns? Birds strikes are almost always during takeoffs and landings when speeds are low. Due to the shape of an airplane, there’s little that will receive a direct blow but rather a glancing one and the bird will explode which will dissipate some of the energy. Let one get in the engine… ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/465 "2017-10-16T04:59:06Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > And I quoted the part that said the core took 60% of the load. There was nothing about material content. did you look at page 45 and note the drawing of the structural part of the wall? the window area is only 40% of the total area of the whole bit. if you read my post WHY are you going off on the tangent about load bearing? ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/466 "2017-10-16T05:01:05Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Birds strikes are almost always during takeoffs and landings when speeds are low. Due to the shape of an airplane, there’s little that will receive a direct blow but rather a glancing one and the bird will explode which will dissipate some of the energy. > Let one get in the engine… even at low speed birds still dent the aircraft and so now speed imparts some special quality to the aluminum so as to be able to penetrate a steel box column? or multiple columns? what? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/467 "2017-10-16T05:01:43Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > incredulity about what may or may not have been kept secret > in no way negates the laws of physics. You continue to express incredulity about simple physics without providing a single shred of evidence for your claims. Noting that it is very difficult to keep secrets among a large number of people for a great length of time are not so much a problem. (And I note that you used your dismissal to avoid responding to my actual point while providing no evidence that ALL the videos were faked.) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/468 "2017-10-16T05:04:30Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > please tell me more, I’m interested, where were you? Why should he, when you just declared a bunch of videos that don’t support your claim to be fraudulent without any evidence whatsoever. I asked you before what it would take to convince you that the official account was true. Can you please answer this question? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/469 "2017-10-16T05:04:43Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > did you look at page 45 and note the drawing of the structural part of the wall? > the window area is only 40% of the total area of the whole bit. > > if you read my post WHY are you going off on the tangent about load bearing? Because that’s what your cite said. The only two parts that mention 60% anything. > [@](#): > > The vertical steel > and concrete core that forms the center of the “tube” supports approximately 60% of the total > gravity load of > the building, while the outside shell bears the remaining 40%. > > For example, the number of damaged core columns, > which bear approximately 60% of the entire gravity load of the building, ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/470 "2017-10-16T05:05:30Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Ping pong ball through a ping pong paddle. Very lightweight object through a piece of wood and snapped the paddle off the handle. Question: is a ping pong ball a custard? does a ping pong ball have wings? there are finite limits to analogs … ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/471 "2017-10-16T05:08:10Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Because that’s what your cite said. The only two parts that mention 60% anything. did you see page 45? there is a drawing there with the dimensions of the steel, and its clear that the window area is only 40% of the whole, if you take the dimensions and calculate the area you will see. do I have to do everything for you? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/472 "2017-10-16T05:09:32Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > even at low speed birds still dent the aircraft and > so now speed imparts some special quality to the aluminum so as to be able to penetrate a steel box column? or multiple columns? what? Going fast enough, it can still penetrate even while breaking up and deforming. [Supersonic ping pong ball going through a paddle.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc-zmb3jAgo) Notice that even as it penetrates, it’s breaking up but still goes all the way through. [Mythbusters supersonic ping pong bal](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV4xVAYCK8Q)l. 1600ft/s-energy of roughly 210 lft-lbs. Much more than almost all .22LRs. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/473 "2017-10-16T05:11:45Z")
I don’t get it. I have a mental picture of how a building of the age of the WTC was made. I have a mental picture of how big and heavy an airplane is and how fast it can go. Given those two, I don’t see how the latter CAN’T bring down the former. ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/474 "2017-10-16T05:13:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Why should he, when you just declared a bunch of videos that don’t support your claim to be fraudulent without any evidence whatsoever. I asked you before what it would take to convince you that the official account was true. > Can you please answer this question? you allege “without any evidence” however the fact that the airline ( according to the video ) penetrated the wall with no apparent reduction in speed, no deformation or structural failure visible or apparent in loss of aircraft bits falling to street level ( and there would have been TONS ) the concept that an airliner essentially maintaining its structural integrity while penetrating a wall such as the WTC tower wall, is too much, the videos are a fabrication a FAKE, and people can make all the excuses they want, but airliners simply do NOT do what is shown in the video. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/475 "2017-10-16T05:16:39Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you allege “without any evidence” however > the fact that the airline ( according to the video ) > penetrated the wall with no apparent reduction in speed, > no deformation or structural failure visible or apparent in loss of > aircraft bits falling to street level ( and there would have been TONS ) > the concept that an airliner essentially maintaining its structural integrity > while penetrating a wall such as the WTC tower wall, is too much, the > videos are a fabrication a FAKE, and people can make all the excuses they > want, but airliners simply do NOT do what is shown in the video. Wow! I must be posting in my sleep, because I do not recall posting any of that! You would think there would be evidence of all these claims I supposedly made, but I can’t seem to find it. Help please? edited to add: None of that crap you just posted answers the question I actually asked. Care to try again? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/476 "2017-10-16T05:18:58Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > I don’t get it. I have a mental picture of how a building of the age of the WTC was made. I have a mental picture of how big and heavy an airplane is and how fast it can go. Given those two, I don’t see how the latter CAN’T bring down the former. It wasn’t the impact. The burning jet fuel (and insulation was torn away from the beams) weakened the steel supports. once those go, each floor (4500 tons) pancaked down on the next. The supports were designed for static loads not dynamic. Given an eight foot ceiling, the floor would take .7 seconds to hit the next floor below at 22.5 ft/sec./ 15.3 mph [Calculator](http://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224835316) ---
**Author:** ![Jay\_Jay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Jay\_Jay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jay_Jay)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/477 "2017-10-16T05:19:26Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Going fast enough, it can still penetrate even while breaking up and deforming. > > [Supersonic ping pong ball going through a paddle.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc-zmb3jAgo) Notice that even as it penetrates, it’s breaking up but still goes all the way through. > > [Mythbusters supersonic ping pong bal](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV4xVAYCK8Q)l. 1600ft/s-energy of roughly 210 lft-lbs. Much more than almost all .22LRs. some things do not scale well, the ping pong ball is a small sphere and the airliner was an aluminum tube \>150 ft long and this makes a HUGE difference, the ball can punch a hole and have the whole thing over with in a few ( that is very few ) milliseconds, however the whole penetration event for the airliner was to have lasted aprox 250 milliseconds. and a LOT can happen in 250 milliseconds. also, please note that the ping pong ball experiment was conducted with the paddle totally perpendicular to the path of the ball, however in the case of FLT175 and FLT77 both encountered the walls they were alleged to have penetrated at angles, what would happen if the paddle were shifted at an angle to simulate the crash of either alleged airliner … ? ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/478 "2017-10-16T05:21:40Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you allege “without any evidence” however > the fact that the airline ( according to the video ) > penetrated the wall with no apparent reduction in speed, > no deformation or structural failure visible or apparent in loss of > aircraft bits falling to street level ( and there would have been TONS ) > the concept that an airliner essentially maintaining its structural integrity > while penetrating a wall such as the WTC tower wall, is too much, the > videos are a fabrication a FAKE, and people can make all the excuses they > want, but airliners simply do NOT do what is shown in the video. Assuming just for a second that the videos aren’t faked. Do you, or do you not agree the plane hit the building at 540 mph, and did not emerge intact from the other side still going 540mph? If it didn’t come out the other side still flying and intact, the you have to admit it was decelerated and broken up while in the building, right? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/479 "2017-10-16T05:23:12Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > some things do not scale well, the ping pong ball is a small sphere and the airliner was an aluminum tube \>150 ft long and this makes a HUGE difference, the ball can punch a hole and have the whole thing over with in a few ( that is very few ) milliseconds, however the whole penetration event for the airliner was to have lasted aprox 250 milliseconds. and a LOT can happen in 250 milliseconds. > also, please note that the ping pong ball experiment was conducted with the paddle totally perpendicular to the path of the ball, however in the case of FLT175 and FLT77 both encountered the walls they were alleged to have penetrated at angles, what would happen if the paddle were shifted at an angle to simulate the crash of either alleged airliner … ? This demonstrates that a weak, fragile material can penetrate a much stronger material given enough speed. Something you’ve been denying. The planes have the advantage of being spear or bullet shaped which greatly enhances their penetrating capability. ---
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/480 "2017-10-16T05:27:15Z")
Jay Jay, the reason the planes cut through some of the metal pillars is actually the same reason a waterjet cutter works. Bear with me a little. At the instant the planes began to crumple against the tower wall, the plane, which is mainly aluminum, is still solid, right? The enormous energy released by crushing an aircraft loaded with fuel against those walls is going to turn parts of the aircraft into molten aluminum. That molten aluminum would still have the velocity it did originally. And aluminum is even heavier than liquid water, and if it’s hot, it has enormous ability to tear through metal. So that molten aluminum is going to act like a plasma jet, burning right through the steel. Far more energy than you’d ever see with a waterjet cutter, all at once. And if you notice, the plane impacts didn’t take the whole tower down right away. You had it almost right. The aluminum is going to dissipate into metal vapor after a short distance, which explains why it didn’t just slice right through every single structural beam on the entire floor. Basically the aircraft is really just a delivery mechanism for the molten aluminum. View it this way. If you shot at a waterjet cutter at an office building from a mile away, you won’t do shit for damage to it, right? The water would all dissipate. But what if you took the same water and loaded it into a cannon shell. Basically a plastic container with the water in it. And you aimed it at a building pillar and launched it at several times the speed of sound. The water would etch some of the way through the pillar. Now, scale up. Instead of a cannon shell and instead of water, use a jetliner. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861.md?page=25)