# 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:** 27
**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, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/521 "2017-10-16T15:32:13Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > So, what do you think actually happened? Did those planes hit the tower, or not? If they didn’t, what do you think happened? I can say for certain that airliners were not used as weapons Please note that it is logically possible to know that a trick has been done without having to explain how the trick was done. ---
**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, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/522 "2017-10-16T15:34:00Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > I can say for certain that airliners were not used as weapons > Please note that it is logically possible to know that a trick has been done > without having to explain how the trick was done. Someone convinced you there was a trick. What convinced you? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/523 "2017-10-16T15:34:02Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > I can say for certain that airliners were not used as weapons > Please note that it is logically possible to know that a trick has been done > without having to explain how the trick was done. Why was the trick done and who is responsible for this mass illusion? ---
**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, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/524 "2017-10-16T15:35:03Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane, all mass would go from 540mph to zero in an instant and fall to the ground? Does that sum it up? “So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane” instantly, no, however given aprox 50 milliseconds to accomplish the task, the airliner would be so seriously damaged as to deposit most of its mass down the side of the building falling to street level. ---
**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, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/525 "2017-10-16T15:35:36Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane, all mass would go from 540mph to zero in an instant and fall to the ground? Does that sum it up? By the way, that would violate the laws of physics you so treasure. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/526 "2017-10-16T15:36:04Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > I can say for certain that airliners were not used as weapons What evidence is there that this is the case. Note that your personal incredulity is not evidence. > [@](#): > > Please note that it is logically possible to know that a trick has been done > without having to explain how the trick was done. Please stop using the word ‘logic’ in your posts. You are employing none of it. ---
**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, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/527 "2017-10-16T15:38:13Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Why was the trick done and who is responsible for this mass illusion? you seem to be stuck on speculation, you don’t need to speculate here the proof positive that there is an offence ( that is something to bust "fearless leader "and all his minions for ) that we can take the ball and run with it to demand justice. all of the clamoring for “who did it” and “how was it done” only serves to increase the noise level and produces nothing. ---
**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, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/528 "2017-10-16T15:38:23Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > I can say for certain that airliners were not used as weapons > Please note that it is logically possible to know that a trick has been done > without having to explain how the trick was done. You are willing to go into all these minute details involving ghod knows how much research to show us what didn’t happen, but when it comes to what supposedly _did_ happen we are supposed to buy that you have no opinions on the matter? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/529 "2017-10-16T15:39:36Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > “So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane” > > instantly, no, however given aprox 50 milliseconds to accomplish the task, > the airliner would be so seriously damaged as to deposit most of its mass down the side of the building falling to street level. That’s not important now. What’s important is, who pulled off this masterful illusion and why? ---
**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, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/530 "2017-10-16T15:39:56Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > What evidence is there that this is the case. Note that your personal incredulity is not evidence. > > Please stop using the word ‘logic’ in your posts. You are employing none of it. not my problem if you do not see the logic here it is possible to see a trick done, and KNOW that it was a trick without having to explain HOW it was done. if you do not see logic here, like I said, not my problem. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/531 "2017-10-16T15:39:57Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > from the very moment that the nose encountered the tower wall, there would have to be slowing down caused but the resistance from having to displace mass, bend/break structural members ( etc… ) and this slowing down would be significant in that it would cause g force stress to the aircraft, and such g force stress to the aircraft would cause breaking up such that the contents of the plane, that is luggage, passengers ( whatever ) would spill out and be deposited in the street below. Um, no. Ridiculous in fact. And this is the crux of most of the issue between reality and 9/11 Truthers…you have zero grasp of physics. Let me take a different tack, however. You obviously know nothing about physics. But you have to concede that in the entire world, someone other than folks in the conspiracy knows something about it, yet? That someone could do basic calculations and understand something about the forces involved…yes? So, assuming you don’t think that physics is only allowed to people involved in your conspiracy theory, surely you can see that someone who knew what they were talking about would have stumbled onto this seeming obvious flaw…right? Literally billions of people have had access to the basic facts (weight of the plane, speed at impact, rough composition of the building, etc), and of those billions literally 10’s of millions of them have at least basic physics and can do a rough calculation and find out that the plane would have hit the building and stopped, dumping the passengers and luggage out like a cartoon. Yet aside from some loopy Truther types, none of those millions have come forth with their calculations to demonstrate this. Why is that do you suppose? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/532 "2017-10-16T15:42:08Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > you seem to be stuck on speculation, you don’t need to speculate here > the proof positive that there is an offence ( that is something to bust "fearless leader "and all his minions for ) that we can take the ball and run with it to demand justice. > all of the clamoring for “who did it” and “how was it done” only serves to increase the noise level and produces nothing. Right, of course you’re right. Now… which specific fearless leader and minions are we busting here? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/533 "2017-10-16T15:42:57Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > “So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane” > > instantly, no, however given aprox 50 milliseconds to accomplish the task, 50 milliseconds of the plane still moving at 500+ mph. even if the plane were instantly converted into tiny segements 1" across it would still be a huge mass moving at over 500mpg. > [@](#): > > the airliner would be so seriously damaged as to deposit most of its mass down the side of the building falling to street level. Why? What calculations have you done to show this is the case? Why would a mass moving at such a high speed striking that the fairly flimsy wall of the tower stop it cold? ---
**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, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/534 "2017-10-16T15:43:04Z")
How widespread is this conspiracy? Name names! ---
**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, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/535 "2017-10-16T15:43:33Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > You are willing to go into all these minute details involving ghod knows how much research to show us what didn’t happen, but when it comes to what supposedly _did_ happen we are supposed to buy that you have no opinions on the matter? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Please do consider the logic here, it is possible to KNOW that airliners were not used as weapons. with that information and that information alone if the AMERICAN public wanted to launch action against Bush, Obama, Trump (et all) for being complicit in a cover-up this would be sufficient to get the case into court and I am convinced that in any court with a Judge not already sold out, we could win a decisive victory. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/536 "2017-10-16T15:44:25Z")
I’d like to thank **LSLGuy** for bring this thread to my attention … I’m sure after reading my comments, everybody will be thanking him … **There was a conspiracy …** and everyone is a co-conspirator … The fact remains, fifteen of the nineteen hijackers on 9/11/01 were Saudi citizens, most likely bankrolled by other Saudi citizens … no one here or anyplace else are willing to admit that Saudi Arabia had more than just a hand in the attack … for cheap gasoline, it’s perfectly fine letting the Saudi royal family lop the heads off of wimin, right? … but God forbid the United States should stop playing patty-cake with the second most brutal and oppressive regime in the whole wide world … to the tune of 108 _billion_ dollars in sales of advance weapons systems … I’m not saying there’s financial or military connections between Saudi Arabia and ISIS … but there’s no argument there’s clear and convincing ideological relationship between the two … just how many members of that royal family agree with ISIS’ destruction of the “infidels” … Conspiracy Theories will abound forevermore … we’ve at least 5% inconsistencies in the matter, more than enough for sustained breeding … ---
**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, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/537 "2017-10-16T15:44:34Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > “So you expect an instant breakup of the entire plane” > > instantly, no, however given aprox 50 milliseconds to accomplish the task, > the airliner would be so seriously damaged as to deposit most of its mass down the side of the building falling to street level. In those 50 milliseconds, the plane will travel 4 ft. You expect the entire plane to break up completely in that distance? Where did you get 50 milliseconds? Do you know what a millisecond is? ETA: 40ft. Misplaced a decimal. My goof. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/538 "2017-10-16T15:44:41Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Lets look at the facts > > B-25 > max weight takeoff weight is 35,000 lbs > max speed is 272 mph > cruise speed is 230 mph > F=M\*A 35,000 x 272 mph =\*\* 9,520,000 \*\* > > B-767 > max takeoff weight is 142,882 lbs or over 4 times the weight of a B-25 > max speed is 486 knots or 559 mph > max fuel load 16,700 usg times 6.8 (lbs/g) or 113,560 lbs which is over 3 times the weight of a B-25 > F=M\*A 142,882 x 559 = \*\*79,871,038 \*\*which is over 8 times the kinetic energy of the B-25 > [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > (Bolding Mine) > > Uh, Magiver? You’re not using the right formula here. > [@XT](#): > > Anyone who took first-year physics? A fully loaded 767 weighs approximately 395,000 lb (179,000 kg). You can plug in your 540 mph figure. The equation is F=MxA. Click [here](https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/physics/force.php) for a calculator if you like. This is supposedly a thread based on physics, but people keep throwing out random physics equations with (apparently) no idea how to apply them. In the equation **F** = _m_ **a** , the **a** stands for **acceleration**. Acceleration is not the same thing as speed or velocity. Nevertheless, two people quoted above have erroneously used the speed of the plane in this equation instead of acceleration. **Magiver** , you’re apparently (and erroneously) trying to use Newton’s 2nd Law (which calculates force, not energy) to calculate the relative kinetic energies (KE) of two airplane collisions. Force is not the same thing as energy (or kinetic energy). The equation to calculate kinetic energy (KE) is **KE** = 0.5 **m** _v_[sup]2[/sup]. Using **Magiver** ’s figures above, I’m calculating that the plane that hit the WTC had more than 17 times the kinetic energy of the B-25 that hit the Empire State 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, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/539 "2017-10-16T15:44:54Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > How widespread is this conspiracy? Name names! Not logical Jim Not logical at all … ---
**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, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/540 "2017-10-16T15:46:32Z")
> [@robby](#): > > This is supposedly a thread based on physics, but people keep throwing out random physics equations with (apparently) no idea how to apply them. > > In the equation **F** = _m_ **a** , the **a** stands for **acceleration**. Acceleration is not the same thing as speed or velocity. Nevertheless, two people quoted above have erroneously used the speed of the plane in this equation instead of acceleration. > > **Magiver** , you’re apparently (and erroneously) trying to use Newton’s 2nd Law (which calculates force, not energy) to calculate the relative kinetic energies (KE) of two airplane collisions. Force is not the same thing as energy (or kinetic energy). > > The equation to calculate kinetic energy (KE) is **KE** = 0.5 **m** _v_[sup]2[/sup]. > > Using **Magiver** ’s figures above, I’m calculating that the plane that hit the WTC had more than 17 times the kinetic energy of the B-25 that hit the Empire State Building. and exactly how was that energy distributed? how was it focused so as to ONLY affect the point where the airliner contacted the wall? have you considered EQUAL & OPPOSITE REACTION? [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=26) [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=28)