# 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:** 37
**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, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/721 "2017-10-16T20:22:27Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Not so much that as much as the content. about my writing style ( or possibly lack thereof … ) is there any comment on the content of my post? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/722 "2017-10-16T20:24:05Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > the why it matters is to demonstrate that even if all you want to consider > is the inertia of the mass to be displaced, there would be a significant jolt > to the airliner something like 100 g, and because there would be decks, > and other impediments involved, the resistance would not be like penetrating > a simple single layer of something but more like having to impact a block of > ballistic jell, and given that, the deceleration would be significant and destructive. The deceleration \*\*was \*\*significant and destructive - the airliner did not go all the way thru the WTC tower, and it destroyed the floors and was destroyed itself. I would call being smashed to pieces a “significant jolt” - wouldn’t you? Regards, Shodan ---
**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, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/723 "2017-10-16T20:24:51Z")
> [@Sunny\_Daze](#): > > **jay\_jay** why did anyone fake this? What are you proposing did happen? You must have some idea, or there is no point of coming here and talking about this. This is the difficult part of the whole effort, you see its possible to KNOW what didn’t happen that is alleged airliner crash into the South wall of the south tower. however people seem to get all hung-up on needing an explanation of what did happen and to that all I can say is insufficient data. however there is sufficient data to KNOW that the official story is a CROCK! ---
**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, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/724 "2017-10-16T20:28:53Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Oh bullshit. Remember the string and weight? Same concept except downward. Nothing can hold on for just a bit. > > Get yourself a 16 ton weight and stand under it. Let us know if you manage to hold it up for just a bit when it’s dropped. things take a finite amount of time no such thing as “instantaneous” failure. and as such, the inside bits could have held on at the same time the outer connections failed and therefore forming a ramp … The complete and total destruction of the towers was the absolutely least likely scenario to be considered 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, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/725 "2017-10-16T20:28:57Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > about my writing style ( or possibly lack thereof … ) > is there any comment on the content of my post? We can’t figure out what you are saying and you want us to comment on it anyway. Gotcha… ---
**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, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/726 "2017-10-16T20:29:51Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > This is the difficult part of the whole effort, > you see its possible to KNOW what didn’t happen > that is alleged airliner crash into the South wall of the south tower. > however people seem to get all hung-up on needing an explanation > of what did happen and to that all I can say is insufficient data. > however there is sufficient data to KNOW that the official story is a CROCK! Nice unsubstantiated opinion you’ve got there. When come back bring facts. ---
**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, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/727 "2017-10-16T20:30:46Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > about my writing style ( or possibly lack thereof … ) > is there any comment on the content of my post? [A quote from Billy Madison](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112508/quotes/qt0403070) comes to mind. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/728 "2017-10-16T20:31:46Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > This is the difficult part of the whole effort, > you see its possible to KNOW what didn’t happen > that is alleged airliner crash into the South wall of the south tower. Could you please explain what _did_ happen? Not what _didn’t_ happen, but what you think _did_ happen. That’s how science works. You judge a hypothesis based on how well it fits observed data. So far you haven’t provided any hypothesis to judge. ---
**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, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/729 "2017-10-16T20:32:32Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The deceleration \*\*was \*\*significant and destructive - the airliner did not go all the way thru the WTC tower, and it destroyed the floors and was destroyed itself. > > I would call being smashed to pieces a “significant jolt” - wouldn’t you? > > Regards, > Shodan how convenient that all of the structural failures of the airliner waited until said airliner was inside the building… and for that matter, in 3 out of 3 airliner crashes that were into buildings, the plane totally entered the building and THEN after the plane was fully inside, the fire-ball of jet fuel ignited … and people see nothing at all even the slightest bit suspicious about the events … REALLY GUYZ? ---
**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, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/730 "2017-10-16T20:33:54Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > things take a finite amount of time Yes. And? This is an argument for you how? > [@](#): > > no such thing as “instantaneous” failure. When resistance to the energy being expected is effectively zilch by comparison it can be pretty instantanious. > [@](#): > > and as such, the inside bits could have held on at the same time the outer connections failed and therefore forming a ramp … No. There is no reason for this. > [@](#): > > The complete and total destruction of the towers was the absolutely least likely scenario to be considered here. Firstly) I would remind you (AGAIN) the part of the core did remain standing for a brief while after the majority of the collapse happened, but also eventually failed. Secondly) Do you have anything whatsoever to support this assertion besides your personal incredulity and constant bleating of ‘nuh-uh!’ Didn’t think so. ---
**Author:** ![PigArcher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bcef8e/32.png) [@PigArcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PigArcher)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/731 "2017-10-16T20:34:23Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > about my writing style ( or possibly lack thereof … ) > is there any comment on the content of my post? This thread is 15 pages long. There have been plenty of substantive responses to your claims. Have you taken any of them seriously and been at all swayed in your beliefs? ---
**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, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/732 "2017-10-16T20:34:51Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > Could you please explain what _did_ happen? Not what _didn’t_ happen, but what you think _did_ happen. > > That’s how science works. You judge a hypothesis based on how well it fits observed data. So far you haven’t provided any hypothesis to judge. you are asking for speculation and I’m not about to go there. the fact is that for a legal case of fraud, all we need is to prove what didn’t happen. the media LIED about the events and the video that alleges to show FLT175 penetrating the south wall of the south tower is damning evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/733 "2017-10-16T20:35:25Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > about my writing style ( or possibly lack thereof … ) > is there any comment on the content of my post? Yes, it’s lacking. There is no content. Where are the physical calculations showing us a model of what would happen when a 767 collides with a building? What you’ve offered is not even close to a full model of the events. ---
**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, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/734 "2017-10-16T20:36:09Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > if the theory is that the tail of the airliner would somehow be limited to 10g deceleration while the nose is subjected to 100 g deceleration then something in the middle is going to have to give, whatever is the weak link in the airliner is going to break and at that the airliner would bust up into several large pieces and impact the wall in a chaotic manner. That “something in the middle” is the part of the plane immediately behind the part that’s impacting the steel columns, not visible on that video because it’s adjacent to the impact point. The point of impact is going to be a tremendous deceleration, but the airframe just isn’t strong enough to transmit more than maybe 10 g’s of force to the parts farther back. So yes, it’s busting up, progressing from the nose to the tail. The parts more than a couple of feet from the impact point at any moment, however, will still be mostly intact although under stress. ---
**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, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/735 "2017-10-16T20:36:17Z")
> [@PigArcher](#): > > This thread is 15 pages long. There have been plenty of substantive responses to your claims. Have you taken any of them seriously and been at all swayed in your beliefs? in other words you don’t have a rebuttal to what I’ve written and you choose to complain instead… ---
**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, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/736 "2017-10-16T20:36:19Z")
“GUYZ”? Mind if I ask how old you are? I asked about your educational background before and didn’t get a response, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2017, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/737 "2017-10-16T20:38:14Z")
Of all the things that could be a sticking point, a plane-shaped hole as a result of a decelerating, disintegrating plane should not be high on the list. Even if we imagined that the plane started to decelerate and disintegrate at the point the nose and leading edges hit the (relatively flimsy) skin of the building…then what? You still have 100+ tons of plane-shaped debris travelling at 400+ miles an hour with the majority of the fuselage and trailing wing edges intact. What shape is it going to make other than that of a plane? I think the problem you may be having is comprehending the energy and momentum present in any object going at that speed, let alone something the size of a jet aircraft. Heck, a fairly flimsy plank of wood weighing a few kg can punch clean through a brick wall when propelled by hurricane or tornado force winds, i.e. less than 300mph. Mythbusters had a few grams of piano wire going at only 300mph and it went straight through a palm trunk, plywood and embedded in a brick wall. _A few grams_ remember. If I had to fake the damage done to the twin towers do you know how I’d do it? I’d fly two fully-loaded airliners into them at full speed. ---
**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, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/738 "2017-10-16T20:40:44Z")
> [@Jay\_Jay](#): > > in other words you don’t have a rebuttal to what I’ve written > and you choose to complain instead… Don’t have a rebuttal for “Jabberwocky” either, and it is more internally consistent. ---
**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, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/739 "2017-10-16T20:41:40Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > That “something in the middle” is the part of the plane immediately behind the part that’s impacting the steel columns, not visible on that video because it’s adjacent to the impact point. The point of impact is going to be a tremendous deceleration, but the airframe just isn’t strong enough to transmit more than maybe 10 g’s of force to the parts farther back. So yes, it’s busting up, progressing from the nose to the tail. The parts more than a couple of feet from the impact point at any moment, however, will still be mostly intact although under stress. so your idea is that the destruction was confined to the area where the airliner met the building and the entire rest of the airliner would be subjected to a most 10 g deceleration force? is that it? … note that even under 10 g any given bit of luggage or for that matter equipment in the airliner would be exerting 10X its weight against whatever was supposed to be holding it. In addition, I submit to this forum that the idea of limiting the g force in the aircraft to an arbitrary 10 g is not realistic, the whole event was said to have taken between 190 & 250 milliseconds and in that time the airliner ONLY experienced total catastrophic failure in the bit that was nearest the wall? Most illogical … ---
**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, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-cares-to-debate-the-events-of-9-11-2001-based-upon-the-laws-of-physics/798861/740 "2017-10-16T20:43:16Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Don’t have a rebuttal for “Jabberwocky” either, and it is more internally consistent. so rather than calling it a global failure, how about picking out a detail that you would like clarified(?) [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=36) [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=38)