Gravitatonal collapse of WTC buildings damaged by fire and newtons laws of momentum.

[rhys 0]

Quote

How could could think the poster was implying anything of the sort? There was nothing in the post to even suggest such a conclusion.

Quote

Freefall would be constant acceleration at 1g until terminal velocity is achieved.

This is basically what he is saying, freefall can occur even if terminal velocity is not met.

This is probably not whet was intended to be said, but it is what was said.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

> It is difficult to imagine how an upper block exerting a force of
>only 36% of its static weight could crush the larger, stronger, undamaged
>lower section of the building to the ground, when the building, at
>any level, was designed to support several times the weight above
>it.

Agreed.

At least there is one person that understands.

Quote

to understand that the dynamic load was several orders of magnitude greater than the static load, and thus caused basically instantaneous failure.

how can the dynamic load be greater than the static load, when the static load is much much greater and much stronger than the dynamic load, can you ellaborate on that please.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[jakee 1,259]

Quote

how can the dynamic load be greater than the static load, when the static load is much much greater and much stronger than the dynamic load, can you ellaborate on that please.

You haven't tried the experiment with the hammer yet, have you?

Using consistent terminology would also help stop you calling two different things by the same name.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[sexatlivna 0]

Quote

Quote

>You seem quite happy to ignore Newton's laws of motion;

Are you saying the buildings went up or something?

The collapses were veritable demonstrations of the laws of motion.

fuck it.

any "pick you word" as yourself should know that.......

mass times velocity equals momentum.

and Sir Issac would concur.

• Quote

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

How could could think the poster was implying anything of the sort? There was nothing in the post to even suggest such a conclusion.

Quote

Freefall would be constant acceleration at 1g until terminal velocity is achieved.

This is basically what he is saying, freefall can occur even if terminal velocity is not met.

This is probably not whet was intended to be said, but it is what was said.

He posted, "Freefall would be constant acceleration at 1g until terminal velocity is achieved." It isn't basically what he was saying, it is exactly what he was saying. He said nothing nor construed anything to suggest otherwise. To suggest he was trying to imply it is impossible for something to freefall unless it makes it to termianl velocity is ridiculous.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[airdvr 200]

Rhys...what I think you ought to do is come here to the States next year. WalMart has tents you can borrow.

I think you should set up a stand near ground zero...on September 11 next year. Borrow a bullhorn from WalMart and start shouting this drivel to anyone who'll listen. I'm willing to bet a couple of NYFD's finest will come by shortly and straighten it out with you.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Coreece 190]

Hi Rhys. I respect your skepicism, and I don't follow all this crap religiously, but when viewing the collapses, all I see is the floors above the impact falling...it's not until the weight of the top floors collapsing on the sub-impact levels they they begin to fall.

I think what you see is what you get.

I'm a very simple guy.

When I was a very little lad and heard about black holes, I automatically assumed that they were at the center of galaxies long b4 I actually knew that to be true...it's like common sense.

It's the same thing with money...When I was 7, I looked at cash money...I said what's the problem...we can just print as much as we want...look what has happened.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[airdvr 200]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0&feature=fvw

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Coreece 190]

Quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_OIXfkXEj0&feature=fvw

Well, if there was a conspiracy, I'd say it was to go down exactly how we saw it...didn't Bush meet personally with the Bin Laden family?

...but, wait...coincidentally the Bin Laden family distanced themselves from Osama.

...but I guess will never know.

Guess we'll have to wait 20 or watever how many years to get the pappers open to public view that tell us all the exact truth, just like with JFK.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[jclalor 12]

"As a reader of the many essays here at World Mysteries.com, I have noticed that many of them deal with, at least in part, what are popularly known as conspiracy theories. The issue to be addressed in this essay will be why such theories seem to enjoy such popularity.

In its basic form a conspiracy theory involves the belief that some events or series of events are the result of a systematic, intentional, and usually covert attempt by the architects of the conspiracy to prevent certain facts from becoming public knowledge. The supposed end result of such conspiracies is practically always to promote the concentration of wealth or power in the hands of these conspirators or their “masters.”


Obviously, all conspiracy theories require that there be a “villain,” a group of “them,” who is responsible for a conspiracy which is invariably targeted at “us.” Beyond this requirement, “generic” conspiracy theories are usually “tailored” to specific conditions.


For our purposes, we can consider conspiracy theories to fall into one of three general categories: obstructive, oppressive, and deceptive.


An obstructive conspiracy theory proposes the existence of a conspiracy whose purpose is to prevent, or at least impede, some event from occurring. An example would be a supposed conspiracy involving “big oil” and the automotive industry to prevent the introduction of an automobile engine that could run on water.


Oppressive conspiracies are unique in that they purport to explain perceived social inequalities or perceived political disenfranchisement. This class of theories is based on the previously mentioned “them” engaged in an active conspiracy against “us.” There are many conspiracy theories of this class circulating in contemporary society. Some of the more widely-held oppressive conspiracy theories maintain that:


• The CIA and the Air Force concealed the fact that a “UFO” crashed near Roswell, NM and that several dead “aliens,” as well as valuable advanced technologies, were recovered from the crash site (and that some of these technologies have been used by the government against its citizens).

• The virus responsible for AIDS was created in a government laboratory and then deliberately released into the black and gay communities in order to rid society of “undesirables.”

• The CIA deliberately allowed, and in some cases was actively involved in, the importation of narcotics to be sold within inner-city neighborhoods.


Oppressive conspiracy theories are frequently used to both obtain and retain political or some other form of power. The well-documented invocation of numerous alleged conspiracies, as well as the recent anti-Semitic ranting, of former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney of Georgia’s 4th congressional district are examples of this tactic.1


A close relative of the oppressive theory is the deceptive conspiracy theory. Deceptive conspiracies are dedicated to presenting the illusion that the root cause of some social, economic, or political problem is something other than actual cause. The most notorious use of this tactic came in the early 1930s in Germany.


Germany was in social and economic chaos as a result of the repressive conditions set forth in the Treaty of Versailles which had essentially stripped Germany of its economic infrastructure. When the worldwide effects of the Great Depression were factored in, the desperate German people were willing to literally try anything. Adolph Hitler and the Nazi party, playing on the already widespread anti-Semitism of the era, blamed all of Germany’s problems on the Jews. It is not necessary to relate the tragic results of this particular conspiracy theory.


We may now turn our attention to the prevalence of contemporary belief in conspiracy theories as well as psycho-social factors that may contribute to such beliefs.


In 1992 sociologist Ted Goertzel2 surveyed 348 residents of southwestern New Jersey concerning their acceptance or rejection of 10 popular conspiracy theories, including the three mentioned above.3 The results of that survey regarding the three above-mentioned theories are summarized in Table 1.


Table 1

Alleged Conspiracy Definitely True Probably True Don’t
Know Probably False Definitely False
UFO 12% 29% 11% 25% 23%
AIDS 4% 8% 10% 26% 53%
Drugs/Inner city 7% 14% 9% 29% 41%

More recently, a national survey of 1,010 adults was conducted by Ohio University to determine the acceptance of various conspiracy theories related to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This survey indicated that 36% of those surveyed believed it to be “‘very likely’ or ‘somewhat likely’ that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them.”4




Given the number of respondents who admit believing that the four above-mentioned conspiracy theories may be true, we may now examine the possible reasons behind why such a significant portion of the population hold such beliefs.


Goertzel identified three traits as being correlated with a belief in conspiracy theories:


anomia, the respondent stated a belief that he/she felt alienated or disaffection relative to “the system;”
a tendency to distrust other people; and
a feeling of insecurity regarding continued employment.

Citing Volkan5, who suggested that insecure and/or discontented people very often feel a need for a tangible enemy on which to externalize their anger, Goertzel notes that conspiracy theories may serve to provide an “enemy” to blame for problems which “otherwise seem too abstract and impersonal.” He further observes that conspiracy theories also provide ready answers for the believer’s unanswered questions and help to resolve contradictions between known ‘facts’ and an individual's belief system. The latter observation seems to be verified by the widespread acceptance within the Muslim world of the contention that the September 11 attacks were the work of Israel, in conjunction with the Bush Administration, in order to increase anti-Muslim sentiments abroad.6


Surprisingly, Goertzel found that there was no correlation between race, age, and economic status and the latter two traits. Although he did not suggest that the two latter traits mentioned above may be self-perpetuating (people who have experienced employment difficulties in the past may be more distrusting of others which, in turn, may lead to future interpersonal issues that can have a negative impact on employment), intuitive reasoning suggests that this could be possible.


In summary, I accept the published findings and opinions of Goertzel et al as being at least subjectively valid. Successful conspiracy theories are those that to some degree empower the believer against what are perceived as external forces that he/she blames for some unpleasant or undesirable facet of their lives. In addition conspiracy theories serve to absolve the individual of some degree of self-accountability since, if the individual is being “oppressed” by some powerful conspiracy, the individual’s efforts at self-advancement will always be futile and thus become nothing more than “a waste of time.” Sadly, it seems that conspiracy theories and their advocates are now deeply engrained in the popular psyche and without prospects for their ultimate refutation."


And, no, I’m not part of some conspiracy against conspiracy theories.

[rhys 0]

Quote

con·spir·a·cy

–noun, plural -cies.
1.
the act of conspiring.
2.
an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3.
a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4.
Law . an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5.
any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

After all that, regardless of what you or anybody thinks, 9/11 was a conspracy by definition regardelss of who carried it out.

This whole 'conspiracy theorist' thing has been conjured up to allow bigoted individuals to attack any person that has the audacity to be patriotic.

Patriotism is another word many of you need to understand the true meaning of.

Think about it! We are all conspiracy theorists by definition no matter who we think is responsable as we all beleive more than one person carried out the attacks.

That concept is just a distration from the truth.

And anybody that questions the government if they do not beleive what they are being told is a patriot by definition.

You guys will have me believe a conspiracy is what nut jobs with tin foil hats beleive in and being patriotic is waving flags and littering the sreets with non-biodegradable confetti while your military maims and tortures innocent civillians of foreign countries.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[winsor 187]

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but a lot of ignorance is even more so.

[nigel99 150]

Quote

Quote

> It is difficult to imagine how an upper block exerting a force of
>only 36% of its static weight could crush the larger, stronger, undamaged
>lower section of the building to the ground, when the building, at
>any level, was designed to support several times the weight above
>it.

Agreed.

At least there is one person that understands.

Quote

to understand that the dynamic load was several orders of magnitude greater than the static load, and thus caused basically instantaneous failure.

how can the dynamic load be greater than the static load, when the static load is much much greater and much stronger than the dynamic load, can you ellaborate on that please.

Force = Mass x acceleration. When the top was stationary the force was lower than once the collapse started. Jakee's example with the hammer is spot on.

The person who you are referencing is misunderstanding basic principles of physics.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Force = Mass x acceleration. When the top was stationary the force was lower than once the collapse started. Jakee's example with the hammer is spot on.

The person who you are referencing is misunderstanding basic principles of physics.

Hmmm, so someone that has compiled a peer reviewed journal on the subject is wrong while another that compares a sky scraper to a toe and a hammer is correct?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[jclalor 12]

Ten pictures the truthers hate:

http://layscience.net/node/124

[Andy9o8 0]

You talk utter bollocks. The casualty is your credibility.
This is already more response than it merits.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Force = Mass x acceleration. When the top was stationary the force was lower than once the collapse started. Jakee's example with the hammer is spot on.

The person who you are referencing is misunderstanding basic principles of physics.

Hmmm, so someone that has compiled a peer reviewed journal on the subject is wrong while another that compares a sky scraper to a toe and a hammer is correct?

Submitting a paper for peer review and/or publication in a scientific journal does not mean the article is correct.
Jakee was correct in the static vs dynamic hammer example. You don't even need to drop it on your toes. Just rest a 16 ounce hammer on and inverted styrofoam cup. Then drop the same hammer on the same cup from a few feet above.

If the lower structure was only supporting 36% of the weight of the upper section, then 64% of that mass has to be supported by something or it will accelerate downward. Acceleration=increased velocity=increased energy=more damage when it hits something. Pretty simple and easily proven by Jakee's example.
Better yet, so you get a real good view of what happens, use your forehead instead of a cup and have somebody more responsible handle the hammer.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Ten pictures the truthers hate:

http://layscience.net/node/124

I have been following these threads when they have popped up now and then. I do not remember engaging in this until now (but I may have)

The two most damaging photos to ryhs position, it seems to me, is the one where the debris is ahead of the building collapse and the one where said debris is falling on WTC #7.

But, I suppose these are photo shopped or something Part of the whole conspiracy....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

Hmmm, so someone that has compiled a peer reviewed journal on the subject is wrong while another that compares a sky scraper to a toe and a hammer is correct?

It can't be any worse than the example you have shown with the Jenga blocks.





______________________________________________________________________________________________________
1981 to 1988 is 7 years-Kallend (oops, it's actually 8 years Kallend)

The decade of the 80's was from 1980 to 1989. 10 years. If you remove 1980 and 1989 you have 1981 to 1988. 8 years.

[jakee 1,259]

Quote

Quote

Force = Mass x acceleration. When the top was stationary the force was lower than once the collapse started. Jakee's example with the hammer is spot on.

The person who you are referencing is misunderstanding basic principles of physics.

Hmmm, so someone that has compiled a peer reviewed journal on the subject is wrong while another that compares a sky scraper to a toe and a hammer is correct?

I didn't compare a skyscraper to a hammer. I used it to illustrate one simple, but fundamental, misaprehension concerning the forces involved.

There is, on the other hand, a person in this thread that thinks the behaviour of a skyscraper can be illustrated with a game of Jenga. Who was that moron?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[winsor 187]

With all due respect, the idea that the collapse of the WTC was staged, and that aircraft flying into them was but a well-choreographed diversion, is one of the dumbest concepts I have ever heard, and I can only conclude that it is being floated to stir the pot.

It is often easier to debate against an elegant but slightly flawed concept than one that is so stupid as to beggar the imagination.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster has merit as a parody, but "WTC Fizix Made EZ" is the realm of the true dullard.

Any third grader who takes this dreck seriously is unfit to advance to the fourth grade. I thus assume the OP is simply putting forth this nonsense for amusement value.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

***

Quote

Quote

Ten pictures the truthers hate:

http://layscience.net/node/124

I have been following these threads when they have popped up now and then. I do not remember engaging in this until now (but I may have)

The two most damaging photos to ryhs position, it seems to me, is the one where the debris is ahead of the building collapse and the one where said debris is falling on WTC #7.

But, I suppose these are photo shopped or something Part of the whole conspiracy....

Careful, your gonna give us away.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

***

Quote

Quote

Ten pictures the truthers hate:

http://layscience.net/node/124

I have been following these threads when they have popped up now and then. I do not remember engaging in this until now (but I may have)

The two most damaging photos to ryhs position, it seems to me, is the one where the debris is ahead of the building collapse and the one where said debris is falling on WTC #7.

But, I suppose these are photo shopped or something Part of the whole conspiracy....

Careful, your gonna give us away.

Did you follow any of the comments further down the page? There are of course some rhys types responding to him and in one of his responses he has a link to many pictures of the Pentagon hit. Pretty much destroys the "not a big plane" tripe.

Thanks for the link

Good info

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Two things the Truthers won't acknowledge about the Pentagon strike:
Eyewitnesses who saw the airliner...
and the fact that the people who said it "sounded like a missile" had, in fact, never heard a missile in their life.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Two things the Truthers won't acknowledge about the Pentagon strike:
Eyewitnesses who saw the airliner...
and the fact that the people who said it "sounded like a missile" had, in fact, never heard a missile in their life.

You hit one thing I was thinking
How the hell would anyone know what a missile sounds like?

Most likely if you ever heard one, it would be the last thing you would ever heard, I would think

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln