Angular momentum of south tower

Shrinker said:
If I may a small point. I assume the NIST investigation was performed to learn more about building performance and how to stop collapses happening in the future. Not to debunk the conspiracy theories. From their point of view, I don't see what the point would be of studying the collapse itself. Surely nobody ever is going to build a skyscraper that could halt a collapse once it had begun? Arresting the progress of 1/3 of a WTC tower travelling at 18mph (after falling 1 storey - somebody check my maths!) is surely next to impossible. No architect would design for it when it would be far, far cheaper to prevent the collapse in the first place.

PS Welcome pdoherty!
Click to expand...

i heard that they were surprised by the models not leading to collapse. in that situation what would they do? i dont know
 
augustine said:
One last thing: frankly, the complaint that NIST "only modelled up to collapse initiation" is a complaint that exposes the paucity of computer modelling experience of the person making it. What exactly should have been modelled? Why? What are the difficulties, constraints, complexities, limitations of modelling different behaviors (elastic, plastic, failure mode) and different loads (static, dynamic, impact)? If a person cannot intelligently discuss the previous, or understand the complexities involved, their criticism of the NIST modelling decisions is distinctly flawed.
Click to expand...

Not an expert on this but I'd imagine that before the collapse estimates of the possible conditions within the towers could be calculated and modelled, penetration of aircraft components, effects of burning fuel, burning material in the buildings and so on possibly resulting in several different scenarios. Once the collapse starts, each event (steel failure, bolt, weld, buckling, concrete floor failure and so on) may have a certain unpredictability and with so many unpredictable events occuring in a short space of time it would make any attempt at modelling pointless and possibly impossible.

Just my opinion.

EDIT: Also, if you can model and understand events up to the collapse what would the point be of modelling anything after if what you're looking for is the cause?
 
Last edited:
Hutch said:
OK, I am not an engineer and it's been 30 years since my last Math and Physics class, but let me see if I understand it (and if I do, pdoherty, and you with an advance math/Physics degree don't, I will join the skeptics in line who doubt your credentials)

As I read it the upper building did begin to tilt in the manner shown in several photos I have seen, but this was due to the damage suffered on the side where the aircraft had taken out numerous supports and other columns had been weakened by fire.

But this tilt placed extreme horizontal sheer forces on the remaining columns, many already weakened by the fires and carrying near or over their maximum loads due to the other column failures. It also sheared and destroyed the floor steel lattice on several of the affected floors, causing them to fail. This overall failure, especially at the hinges that held the steel colums together, happening within literally fractions of a second after the upper portion of the building started tilting, led to a vertical fall due to the nature of Gravity.

That the portion did not fall off or continue the tilt was (1) The milliseconds resistance of the remaining steel columns trying to retain the building in a vertical position and (2) The failure milliseconds later of the columns leading to a Gravity controlled descent.

At least, that is how I read the paper. You?
Click to expand...


how does me studying thermodynamics, waves, fluid mechanics, boundary flows and electromagnetism make me qualified to study building collapse?

ur an idiot
 
einsteen said:
Welcome Doherty,

Check this excellent site

http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2dem1/

The upper edge of the south tower is completely damaged when the block travels its length downward, also seen on your movie.
Click to expand...

OH Deities! They are invading my country!
That's a conspiracy site which, to summarize, claim that the WTC2 was brought down by laser guided missiles disguised as planes..........
 
how does me studying thermodynamics, waves, fluid mechanics, boundary flows and electromagnetism make me qualified to study building collapse?

ur an idiot
Click to expand...
I think degree fakers are gr8 cuz they make me lol... :rolleyes:

What person with an advance degree in any science discipline can't separate chaff like the kind in this thread?
 
Blutarsky said:
I think degree fakers are gr8 cuz they make me lol... :rolleyes:

What person with an advance degree in any science discipline can't separate chaff like the kind in this thread?
Click to expand...

because i never studied structures u fool. it was all fluids oh and some newtonian mechanics but how the **** am i expected to analyse the towers collapse if i aint an engineer
 
The_Fire said:
OH Deities! They are invading my country!
That's a conspiracy site which, to summarize, claim that the WTC2 was brought down by laser guided missiles disguised as planes..........
Click to expand...

now ur being silly, we all know the missiles were guided by NASA
 
shrinker said:
If I may a small point. I assume the NIST investigation was performed to learn more about building performance and how to stop collapses happening in the future. Not to debunk the conspiracy theories. From their point of view, I don't see what the point would be of studying the collapse itself. Surely nobody ever is going to build a skyscraper that could halt a collapse once it had begun? Arresting the progress of 1/3 of a WTC tower travelling at 18mph (after falling 1 storey - somebody check my maths!) is surely next to impossible. No architect would design for it when it would be far, far cheaper to prevent the collapse in the first place.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, If the failure of 1 floor was the cause and that failure resulted in the columns above and below to give, wouldn't that mean the building above would fall 2 floors before meeting any resistance?
 
pdoherty76 said:
because i never studied structures u fool. it was all fluids oh and some newtonian mechanics but how the **** am i expected to analyse the towers collapse if i aint an engineer
Click to expand...

Because as far as I remember, most students are required to take Statics and Dynamics as prerequisites for any engineering related degree INCLUDING physics. Those courses deal with structures and mechanics of structures. What course of study would lead you to exclusively study fluid mechanics outside of an engineering discipline that would have compelled you to take Statics and Dynamics?
 
pdoherty76 said:
u never took my bet gravy

1000 quid?
Click to expand...
What bet? I just took you off ignore so I could read the OP in this thread.

Curious as to why you said this:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ive been banned from JREFthat PROVES i u lot couldnt handle me. I totally destroyed you.
Click to expand...

Can you point to an exchange in which you "totally destroyed" one of us, as you had promised to do when you first registered here?

Just one cite will do, pd.
 
pdoherty76 said:
ive just looked at this video that jones links to and it proves him wrong by showing the rotation continues!

http://www.911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/docs/south_tower_collapse.mpeg
Click to expand...

indeed, you can see the corner closest to the camera cause a wave in the dust even after it is obscured, if you look closely

pdoherty76 said:
thankyou gravy

i will consider that debunked. u really take this seriously dont you?

im started to be convinced that the towers simply fell cos the steel weakened, hate to admit it
Click to expand...


Seriously, mad props. You are the first conspiracy theorist i've ever seen that saw the overwhelming evidence against you and changed your mind.

i saw loose change and believed it for about a week

then I read gravy's loose change guide and wanted to strangle avery &co for making a fool out of me.
 
the ignore option is the best on this website, my fans try in vain to talk to me

i already have 14 cretins in my ignore list
 
It's also interesting how you doubt your own legitimate right to analyze this material since you studied physics and not structural engineering, but you readily espouse the rantings of another physicist who claims that he does have the knowledge? Sounds like you should be ignoring his analysis just as you doubt your own.
 
gravy i bet u 1000 pounds my degree was real after u claimed it was in numerology

i said i had destroyed people to wind up the clowns in the slc blogs and remember, i really thought id been banned from here

in certain arguments i have destroyed ppl, check the thread on a national release of loose change
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom