• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

David Chandler jumps the shark

Notconvinced said:
Again, nobody is contesting that. When you say "floor" you mean literally just the flat span of poured concrete and truss that people walk upon. When I say "floor" I mean the entirety of the space that the elevator moves through from level to level, thus including the exterior and interior support columns which your side like to pretend didn't exist. The "floor" that resists and diminishes the momentum of the falling floor above it includes all of those features, the stairwells, the machinery, the articles, etc.
Click to expand...
Are you using the contents of the "floor" as mass in a non-elastic collision?. If so then note that this is a tiny fraction of the mass of the moving upper section. As for the columns I'll speak to that next.

If I actually believed you could somehow consolidate all of the upper tower's momentum onto weak floor joints while miraculously bypassing the outer box columns, stairwells, inner columns, etc we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Click to expand...
Still not sure what possible structural support you believe the stairwells are giving. You do know the walls were simply double thickness of drywall?

As for actual load bearing structure:
Initial collapse occurs, the gif of this event for WTC2 that ozeco posted several times illustrates that the upper block has rotated about its CoG. The column sections of that upper block simply cannot line up to direct impact forces as an axial load on the lower section columns. Therefore ALL of the moving mass of that upper section will hit the floor span. The floor span was connected to the columns by components designed to transfer the normal loading on ONE floor space. The dynamic loading of the entire upper section is orders of magnitude greater than those components were designed to handle.

The connections fail having slowed the upper block about as much as a Styrofoam cup slows your foot as you stomp on it. The falling mass, now joined by the concrete floor span that has been trashed and the contents of that floor space, continues on, gaining more velocity until it hits the next floor span.
Perimeter column sections peel away with no lateral support(originally supplied by the now missing flora trusses).
Core columns lose lateral support through floor trusses to perimeter and much of the intercolumn beams. Columns now succumb to slender column instability and buckle.

Clear now?
 
Notconvinced said:
minus, less than, reduced by...

I assumed you would reduce the p, not try and subtract the p from KE
Click to expand...
KE of the initial falling mass, minus the momentum of one floor.
Click to expand...
You said you were subtracting, lessening, reducing KE by a value of p. Not me.


Still makes no sense. Try again.

Might try addressing that comment about a mass vector as well. Do you simply have trouble properly expressing yourself in a fashion that makes scientific sense?
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
As for actual load bearing structure:
Initial collapse occurs, the gif of this event for WTC2 that ozeco posted several times illustrates that the upper block has rotated about its CoG. The column sections of that upper block simply cannot line up to direct impact forces as an axial load on the lower section columns.
Click to expand...
ArrowedROOSD.jpg

Dynamic version available but there is enough in the static to prove the point.

jaydeehess said:
Therefore ALL of the moving mass of that upper section will hit the floor span. The floor span was connected to the columns by components designed to transfer the normal loading on ONE floor space. The dynamic loading of the entire upper section is orders of magnitude greater than those components were designed to handle.
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
Last edited:
Notconvinced said:
In your heart apparently.... positrons man, positrons...

I said there would be less KE upon the next impact iteration, and pointed out that this would be because momentum was used up in destruction. So I said there would be less momentum. Then in typical disinfo fashion Jay claimed I tried to subtract p from KE. I used a fractional format to represent the depleting momentum in a pattern that matched Grizzle's analysis.
Click to expand...

What 911 truth can't grasp is physics, and the reality a floor fails over 29,000,000 pounds; simple math makes 911 truth claims of CD BS; 19 terrorists did 911, makes 911 truth liars and pushers of false information; fooling a fringe few.

Where is the damage to WTC due to thermite? There is no damage; thus no evidence, thus big fail by 911 truth for 14 years of misleading gullible followers.

Why can't you specify the KE lost? Can't you do the math?

Why can't 911 truth do math, physics and science. Guess the BS about anti-matter is the other fantasy. Google knowledge runs thin...
 
Last edited:
Notconvinced said:
Diminishing return... Each iteration of impact yields less and less destruction.


Sent from our shared looking glass platform
Click to expand...

Each impact releases more PE, and gravity accelerates the new mass, and the next impact has more KE. Simple physics eludes 911 truth fantasy CD.

19 terrorists did 911, 911 truth has no evidence for CD.

Notconvinced said:
No
1/2 ((14/15)m1(14/15)v1))2=KE
Really?? :eye-poppi
Click to expand...
Proof there is no useful knowledge of physics. What units is this in? lol

You failed to explain how you made up this BS? Please explain in great detail what this means.
Why can't you explain it?
 
jaydeehess said:
According to the writings of a great man its actually 42.

Then again, an improbability drive would explain a lot.
Click to expand...


[emoji242][emoji242][emoji242][emoji242][emoji242][emoji242][emoji106]


Sent from our shared looking glass platform
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom