LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 36,711
Good catch.
I am sure that Mr. Brown would interpret that sentence as support for his contention that, well...you know.
The New Physics?
- Thread starter Furcifer
- Start date
Good catch.
I am sure that Mr. Brown would interpret that sentence as support for his contention that, well...you know.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
i feel really frustrated that i don't have the ability to understand this work in it's entirety. when hopefully, some day, i can, then i would love (assuming all the calculations and conclusions are correct of course) to see griffin, wood, fetzer et al shot down in flames with it. oh the fkn joy......
BV
three dreaded words........C4 coated rebar.
i would link to the monstrous thread but i am terrified of the wrath we might incur if you posted in it.
:-}
BV
Great job! David Benson is another great guy.
I've asked him over to say a few words.
HeyLeroy
Vegan Cannibal
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2005
- Messages
- 5,567
Yeah! You must be CTinsanIT. I got there late; about 12:30, after the Tigers bombed out.
Last edited:
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Oh, nooooo do not bring up that denizen of the deeps.
,,, and here i was, afraid that I had made a gramattical error
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Oh I too simply cannot follow the math to any great extent. Until shown otherwise though I believe that the use of the equations and the calculations are valid.
I have no way(living in a small town without a university library) of verifying that they have taken the information from the papers and books cited in the references.
However, given that the authors have earned respect in their community of engineers and have produced other papers without widespread critics from the feild, I believe that I can trust their authority in this matter. I do not believe that this belief is a strict appeal to authority as , as I said, the authors have the respect of their peers. Jones simply could not find a peer review publication(at least not a peer in the physics or engineering feilds) that would publish him.
good ole chris, we all sort of got to know him. and then he just disappeared the poor dab. honestly hope he's ok. he did seem to be teetering on the abyss a little.
sorry about the derail BTW folks
BV
ditto me. but it's a dead cert that the likes of woods and co will attempt to refute this somehow. it is an ambition of mine to be at such a level as to be able see for myself where/if they are wrong. the maths, equations and analysis etc seem very lofty and daunting right now. it might take me many months but i will get there. in fact i'm going to print this out and go through it step by step it is the best brainfood there is.
BV
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Its a little late for me. I quit my physics study to go for a diploma in electronic technology, 30+ years ago.
Maybe after I retire I can go back and get the B.Sc. just to make up for a past error.
David is over at the sciforum's right now if anyone has any questions.
He's having a hard time registering here.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=12383&st=3690
R.Mackey,
David stated
By all means invite anybody that actually wants to do physics, ask physics & math questions to post on PhysOrgForum. For example, I noticed somebody on JREF didn't understand why the crush-down equation doesn't have an analytic solution. I could explain that it does, it's just that it is a infinite series...
Ah. That would make sense.
I didn't examine it in depth, just browsed, and at first glance it looked integratable. There are well-known classes of differential equations that cannot be solved analytically, and this didn't appear to be any of them, but of course it takes much more than a casual glance to be certain.
In any event, a well-presented paper.
Alareth
Philosopher
Sadly, Chris didn't dissappear mysteriously:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79711
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
It strikes me that there are CT's who are saying to themselves that they also have experts who dispute Bazant et al in this paper. Experts such as Jones, Griffin, Woods and Reynolds, maybe even Jowenko.
In this matter, the topic of this particular paper, we can eliminate Reynolds and Griffin as expert in any relevant feild. Jowenko has not ever stated that he thought the towers were CD. That leaves the physicist Jones, and the structures engineer, Woods. However Woods has never produced any paper that is more than a hand waving arguement or at most and easily disputed simplistic idea of how the collapses should have been. In addition her expertise is in dental equipment and AFAIK has never been involved in construction of steel buildings let alone the destruction of them. So her credibility is rather low.
That leaves Jones. He however is alone in his feild. The university he was at saw his faculty dissociate itself from his views and he has never produced a paper with the detail of any of Bazant's.
In this matter, the topic of this particular paper, we can eliminate Reynolds and Griffin as expert in any relevant feild. Jowenko has not ever stated that he thought the towers were CD. That leaves the physicist Jones, and the structures engineer, Woods. However Woods has never produced any paper that is more than a hand waving arguement or at most and easily disputed simplistic idea of how the collapses should have been. In addition her expertise is in dental equipment and AFAIK has never been involved in construction of steel buildings let alone the destruction of them. So her credibility is rather low.
That leaves Jones. He however is alone in his feild. The university he was at saw his faculty dissociate itself from his views and he has never produced a paper with the detail of any of Bazant's.