# 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:** 33
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/641 "2017-10-16T17:29:17Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > the airliner did not slow down so as to be seen on the video? Everyone, I’m pretty sure that what our new friend is saying here is that in the video of the 767 hitting the South Tower, you don’t notice a significant deceleration after the nose starts hitting the wall - the tail seems to continue at the same speed until it too hits the wall. Now let’s go through the physics of that. The plane was reported to be going what, 540 mph? That’s around 800 ft/sec. If the plane was about 150 ft long, then it travels its length in 190 ms. Now here’s how to estimate how much we’d expect the tail to slow down once the nose has impacted the wall: imagine you’re at the tail of the plane, and the other end of the plane gets a large force exerted on it. How much force can it transmit through the body of the plane to where you are? The plane isn’t infinitely strong - as a rough guess, we can say that maybe 10 g’s of acceleration is all the frame could transmit - the front of the plane is decelerating more quickly as it hits the wall, but the material between it and the tail can only take 10 g’s. So the question is: how much will the tail of the plane slow down in that ~190 ms if it’s being decelerated at 10 g’s? The answer is 10 \* 32 ft/s^2 \* 0.19 s, or about 60 ft/s. So the tail of the plane would slow down from 800 ft/s to about 740 ft/s. Jay\_Jay, do you really expect to be able to notice this kind of change on the video? ---
**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, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/642 "2017-10-16T17:31:12Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > To the 9/11 conspiracy theorists: The fact that it happened, \*\*is \*\*proof that the laws of physics permitted it. > > You want proof that 9/11 was possible under the laws of physics? It is its own proof. See the collapsing buildings? See? There’s your proof. did the buildings “collapse” with or without help from explosives thermite, or black magic & WitchCraft? what? ---
**Author:** ![BeepKillBeep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@BeepKillBeep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeepKillBeep)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/643 "2017-10-16T17:34:03Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > did the buildings “collapse” with or without help from explosives > thermite, or black magic & WitchCraft? > > what? Without. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/644 "2017-10-16T17:35:48Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > did the buildings “collapse” with or without help from explosives > thermite, or black magic & WitchCraft? > > what? quite simply > [@Czarcasm](#): > > Gravity. Please pay attention. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/645 "2017-10-16T17:36:20Z")
> [@XT](#): > > I’m assuming you mean as a defect in the build process. I’ve heard this, but, really, the impact alone would have stripped most of it off anyway. If you watch that first video I linked to earlier for Jay-Jay it shows a model of the actual impact, and you can see the plane become almost a high-speed liquid which scoured the structure all the way through and out the other side. They simply don’t design buildings or fire retardant systems with the impact of a 300k lb aircraft going over 500 MPH and filled with jet fuel in mind. I’m saying the lower floors would have been missing plenty of fire retardant due to age even without being affected by impact. ---
**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, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/646 "2017-10-16T17:37:06Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > did the buildings “collapse” with or without help from explosives > thermite, or black magic & WitchCraft? > > what? The buildings did not “collapse”-they collapsed. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/647 "2017-10-16T17:42:16Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The buildings did not “collapse”-they collapsed. Seems to me that we established early in this thread that the “buildings” were actually holograms and never existed there in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/648 "2017-10-16T17:45:43Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > did the buildings “collapse” with or without help from explosives > thermite, or black magic & WitchCraft? Again: the survivors from Stairwell B reported only hearing the sound of Tower One collapsing above them, not one word about hearing any explosive charges being set off. Nothing about being burned by thermite charges, either. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/649 "2017-10-16T17:46:59Z")
The “buildings” “collapsed” because they were “hit” by “air quotes.” ---
**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, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/650 "2017-10-16T17:48:53Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Again: the survivors from Stairwell B reported only hearing the sound of Tower One collapsing above them, not one word about hearing any explosive charges being set off. Nothing about being burned by thermite charges, either. Did you mean, the “survivors”? ---
**Author:** ![rock\_party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19b73/32.png) [@rock\_party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rock_party)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/651 "2017-10-16T17:54:45Z")
The planes were holograms and the buildings collapsed when the huge magnets that were secretly installed under the towers were activated. ---
**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, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/652 "2017-10-16T17:56:46Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > Everyone, I’m pretty sure that what our new friend is saying here is that in the video of the 767 hitting the South Tower, you don’t notice a significant deceleration after the nose starts hitting the wall - the tail seems to continue at the same speed until it too hits the wall. Now let’s go through the physics of that. > > The plane was reported to be going what, 540 mph? That’s around 800 ft/sec. If the plane was about 150 ft long, then it travels its length in 190 ms. Now here’s how to estimate how much we’d expect the tail to slow down once the nose has impacted the wall: imagine you’re at the tail of the plane, and the other end of the plane gets a large force exerted on it. How much force can it transmit through the body of the plane to where you are? The plane isn’t infinitely strong - as a rough guess, we can say that maybe 10 g’s of acceleration is all the frame could transmit - the front of the plane is decelerating more quickly as it hits the wall, but the material between it and the tail can only take 10 g’s. > > So the question is: how much will the tail of the plane slow down in that ~190 ms if it’s being decelerated at 10 g’s? The answer is 10 \* 32 ft/s^2 \* 0.19 s, or about 60 ft/s. So the tail of the plane would slow down from 800 ft/s to about 740 ft/s. > > Jay\_Jay, do you really expect to be able to notice this kind of change on the video? OK oh science guy, what happens to an airliner traveling at 800 ft/sec and encountering an obstacle that is 2% of its own mass? there will be a jolt as the airliner overcomes the inertia of said mass and of what magnitude would this jolt be? ---
**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, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/653 "2017-10-16T17:56:53Z")
> [@rock\_party](#): > > The planes were holograms and the buildings collapsed when the huge magnets that were secretly installed under the towers were activated. Good thing the switch was turned the right way. Would have been embarrassing to have the Towers rise up in the air. ---
**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, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/654 "2017-10-16T17:57:56Z")
> [@rock\_party](#): > > The planes were holograms and the buildings collapsed when the huge magnets that were secretly installed under the towers were activated. L0L! ---
**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, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/655 "2017-10-16T18:01:10Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > L0L! And your theory is…? ---
**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, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/656 "2017-10-16T18:02:47Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > OK > oh science guy, what happens to an airliner traveling at 800 ft/sec > and encountering an obstacle that is 2% of its own mass? > there will be a jolt as the airliner overcomes the inertia of said mass > and of what magnitude would this jolt be? The Towers were not a monolithic mass. There’s a large portion of open space. The facade the planes hit would not deliver force to the core nor were they reinforced by the core. The plane won’t overcome the inertia otherwise the Towers would have been pushed over at impact. Instead, the planes delivered their energy to the building by both friction and impact. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/657 "2017-10-16T18:07:27Z")
**Czarcasm** , the name of this fallacy (from maybe 10 pages back) is Argumentum ad AlexJonesium. Argumentum ad Infowarsium is also acceptable. **Jay\_Jay** , I’d like to thank you for this thread. You’ve managed to bring together all of the SDMB, regardless of race, creed, religion, or political affiliation onto one side of an issue. ---
**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, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/658 "2017-10-16T18:07:28Z")
98% of all Conspiracy Theories make the other 2% look bad … ---
**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, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/659 "2017-10-16T18:10:53Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > OK > oh science guy, what happens to an airliner traveling at 800 ft/sec > and encountering an obstacle that is 2% of its own mass? > there will be a jolt as the airliner overcomes the inertia of said mass > and of what magnitude would this jolt be? Where do you get this 2%? The planes were only .0395% of the weight of the Towers. Unless you think a 767 weighs 10,000 tons. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/660 "2017-10-16T18:12:52Z")
I believe everything Jay\_Jay says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff. [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=32) [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=34)