Heiwa's Pizza Box Experiment

[uruk]

No, it will not happen! Reason is that F2 is of very short duration and, applied to the impactor, decelerates the impactor, etc, etc, and arrests it. Plenty of energy absorbed in the process which is very quick.

It can deaccelerate the impactor but that energy had gone into the impacted mass The energy has gone into disarticulating the structures of the impacted floor. Remember that gravity is still applying a force. If the impacted structures are damaged so that they can no longer support the load of the upper impacting mass the movement of the upper mass will continue into the the next floor applying the force of momentum plus the added mass of the floor that was disarticulated.

Note that F2 is not applied to any columns! It is applied to floors, that fail, etc, etc. and consume energy. F2 acts as a brake.

Why not? the columns are still being impacted.
Remember when the floor fail they can no longer provide structural support or bear loads. The structure were designed to support a static mass not mass plus kenetic energy. Remeber Newton. Energy is not consumed just changed to another state.

Note that Bazant 'assumes' that the upper block is rigid, i.e. it cannot fail; it is indestructible, friction has no effect on it, even if F2 should be able to decelerate it, which Bazant conveniently ignores.

The upper structur is not indestructable but the mass still remains and is still in motion impacting on the floor below it.

Therefore, logically, any F2 acting on Bazant's rigid upper block cannot stop it, which then Bazant via some magic equations tries to prove. But no such upper, rigid block exists in reality! As soon as Bazant assumes that the upper block is not rigid, he will get the same result as I have presented in my papers.

The mass still remains if the structures rigidity does not.

The individual pellets from a shot gun blast still imparets energy on a target dispite the fact that they are not rigidly connected to each other. The energy is accumulative.

 

[Heiwa]

It took 2 years to design that website? You should have fired your web designer.

Actually before that my papers/books were published hard copy and some of the papers/articles published HC in technical magazines appeared on the web. 1996 the biggest daily newspaper in Sweden published a half page article by me that were widely read, etc, etc. The reaction by the government(s) and concerned parties was JREF style; 'unintelligent gibberish by an unreasonable, unscientific a-hole' and accusations that I was trying to unseat the Finnish government!! The case is still going on, though, and nobody has found any errors in my observations, calculations and conclusions. It is just about better safety at sea that governments ignore for strange reasons.

So I thought it was a good idea to have my own site. I cannot fire the web designers as they are all friends. We had/have a lot of fun. Ah, those were the days in Heliopolis, Egypt and Nikolaev/Odessa, Ukraine and Mombasa, Kenya and Freiberg, Saxony.

 

[phunk]

No, it will not happen! Reason is that F2 is of very short duration and, applied to the impactor, decelerates the impactor, etc, etc, and arrests it. Plenty of energy absorbed in the process which is very quick.

It's also applied to the tower below. Are you forgetting newton's 3rd law already?

Note that F2 is not applied to any columns! It is applied to floors, that fail, etc, etc. and consume energy. F2 acts as a brake.

The floors are not magically levitating, they are directly connected to the columns. You can't apply load to the floors without it transferring to the columns.

Note that Bazant 'assumes' that the upper block is rigid, i.e. it cannot fail; it is indestructible, friction has no effect on it, even if F2 should be able to decelerate it, which Bazant conveniently ignores.

The upper block collapsing doesn't make arrest more likely. It would only reduce the height of the upper block, not it's overall mass (except for minor spill over the sides). You still have most of the mass of the upper block falling onto the top of the lower block, and the same momentum that has to be arrested. Actually, collapsing the upper block ADDS to the momentum that has to be stopped, as its center of mass will fall farther.

Therefore, logically, any F2 acting on Bazant's rigid upper block cannot stop it, which then Bazant via some magic equations tries to prove. But no such upper, rigid block exists in reality! As soon as Bazant assumes that the upper block is not rigid, he will get the same result as I have presented in my papers.

There is bias towards the lower half receiving more damage. It's called gravity, it's pulling all of the mass of both parts in the same direction. When a piece breaks off the lower block, it becomes part of the falling mass. When a piece breaks off the upper block, it's still part of the falling mass. Nothing is falling upwards into the upper block, only downwards towards the lower block. Hense, the damage has a tendency to propogate downward rather than upward.

 

[nicepants]

Note that F2 is not applied to any columns! It is applied to floors, that fail, etc, etc. and consume energy. F2 acts as a brake.

If a floor fails, it's no longer acting as a brake...it becomes part of the falling mass.

 

[alexi_drago]

No, it will not happen! Reason is that F2 is of very short duration and, applied to the impactor, decelerates the impactor, etc, etc, and arrests it. Plenty of energy absorbed in the process which is very quick.

You do know that the quicker a deceleration (acceleration) rate is the larger the force is? and there is equal forces acting in opposite directions on the object being decelerated and the object decelerating it?

'Plenty of energy absorbed'

what's absorbing the energy? you talk of your dislike of all things magical but your forces appear to be magically disappearing.

 

[Zipster]

You do know that the quicker a deceleration (acceleration) rate is the larger the force is? and there is equal forces acting in opposite directions on the object being decelerated and the object decelerating it?

'Plenty of energy absorbed'

what's absorbing the energy? you talk of your dislike of all things magical but your forces appear to be magically disappearing.

Exactly! The different in what you feel if someone slowly punched you and if that person did a quick jab to your ribs. Impulse, got to love it!

I = F * delta time. Thus the force increases as the time decreases.

Try this experiment. Throw a fairly hefty mass up in the air and catch it without retracting your arms as you catch it. Then try it again and "cushion" the momentum of the mass as it falls.

 

[Heiwa]

It's also applied to the tower below. Are you forgetting newton's 3rd law already?

No, F2 is only applied to the upper block floor that is damaged, because it is weak (and energy is consumed). It is -F2 that is applied to the lower structure column that is not damaged because it is strong - only deformed (and same amount of energy is consumed). You have not understood Newton's 3rd law. Apple (upper block), ground (lower structure)!

According Bazant F2 does not damage (or affect) the upper block (read floor) because it is assumed rigid = undestructible, while -F2 apparently causes a shock wave in the column that causes global collapse of the whole tower.

It is this Bazant conclusion that my children audience cannot understand. That a thin upper body floor of large area is rigid (!) and can apply a force (-F2) to a much smaller area lower structure column that is destroyed. They all agree with me. The lower structure column penetrates the floor with F2 = the column does not globally collapse due to -F2.

In the PBT experiment PBT applies a force F2 on the impactor and the force -F2 applied by the impactor on the PBT makes the impactor bounce off the PBT.

 

[Heiwa]

You do know that the quicker a deceleration (acceleration) rate is the larger the force is? and there is equal forces acting in opposite directions on the object being decelerated and the object decelerating it?

'Plenty of energy absorbed'

what's absorbing the energy? you talk of your dislike of all things magical but your forces appear to be magically disappearing.

Yes, the force couple F2/-F2 is only active between contact and arrest when all the energy applied is consumed due to deformation, local failures friction and deceleration of local parts involved. After that they become 0. They do not disappear. If anything starts to move again, they will pop up.

The upper block is quite big but only the parts affected by the contact (at the bottom of the upper block) absorbs energy. The top parts of the lower structure also consumes energy.

Bazant assumes that any/every part of the upper block is rigid = indestructible and based on that stupid assumption all the parts of the upper block just destroys anything in its way. It is craizier than the Judy Wood lazer beams destruction weapon.

 

[Heiwa]

If a floor fails, it's no longer acting as a brake...it becomes part of the falling mass.

No locally damaged floor of lower structure becomes part of the falling mass (of upper body). They just hinge down around the bolts of the unaffected side columns
.
The locally damaged floors of the upper body are already part of the falling mass, and when they hinge around the bolts of the unaffected side columns, they act as brakes when in contact with the lower floors. Friction you know!

Please - nothing becomes part of the originally falling mass. It remains constant while being sliced into smaller parts. Who is gluing new parts to the falling mass after contact? OBL?

How on earth could a locally failed, static part of lower structure suddenly become part of a falling mass? You are a victim of NWO physics. No university teaches that falling masses attract new parts while dropping. Or is the dropping upper object suddenly a magnet?

 

[TheDaver]

Actually before that my papers/books were published hard copy and some of the papers/articles published HC in technical magazines appeared on the web. 1996 the biggest daily newspaper in Sweden published a half page article by me that were widely read, etc, etc. The reaction by the government(s) and concerned parties was JREF style; 'unintelligent gibberish by an unreasonable, unscientific a-hole' and accusations that I was trying to unseat the Finnish government!! The case is still going on, though, and nobody has found any errors in my observations, calculations and conclusions. It is just about better safety at sea that governments ignore for strange reasons.

If it’s anything like what you’ve posted here, it would be because it’s so bad it’s “not even wrong” and would take more effort to fully correct than it did to write it in the first place. I think the gov’t’s and concerned parties’ description was probably pretty accurate.

So I thought it was a good idea to have my own site.

That’s how TimeCube got started, isn’t it…

 

[TheDaver]

No locally damaged floor of lower structure becomes part of the falling mass (of upper body). They just hinge down around the bolts of the unaffected side columns […]
nothing becomes part of the originally falling mass. It remains constant while being sliced into smaller parts. Who is gluing new parts to the falling mass after contact?

You’re kidding, right?

Seriously, collapsing floors don’t become part of the falling mass? They somehow “hinge” away into oblivion? And the falling mass getting sliced into smaller parts somehow reduces its weight?

 

[jsfisher]

A tug boat is propelled by a force -F₁ towards a barge in the river. As soon as the tug makes contact with the barge, the barge exerts a force of F₁ on the tug.

So far so good?

There is also an additional force, F₂, that accounts for frictional effects fo the water, etc. Since F₁ - F₂ + F₂ > 0, the motion of the tug boat is completely arrested, and the tug boat will come to a stop in short order.

Is that really what's being said here?

I never realized tug boats were part of the New World Order.

 

[uruk]

No locally damaged floor of lower structure becomes part of the falling mass (of upper body). They just hinge down around the bolts of the unaffected side columns.

The locally damaged floors of the upper body are already part of the falling mass, and when they hinge around the bolts of the unaffected side columns, they act as brakes when in contact with the lower floors. Friction you know!

The bolts are not indestructable. How much stress do you think the bolts can handle? They will break apart under the stress.

Please - nothing becomes part of the originally falling mass. It remains constant while being sliced into smaller parts. Who is gluing new parts to the falling mass after contact? OBL?

Gravity. When the impacted parts get knocked or torn loose from it's support structue what happens to it? Does it float in mid air? What happens to it's potential energy due to gravity?

Have you ever seen the damage caused by a shotgun blast? When the pellets leave the barrel they are not rigidly connected to each other but they still impart accumulated energy into the target.

How on earth could a locally failed, static part of lower structure suddenly become part of a falling mass? You are a victim of NWO physics. No university teaches that falling masses attract new parts while dropping. Or is the dropping upper object suddenly a magnet?

Gravity. When the structures break away from thier support they become mobile under the force of gravity. Because of gravity, the newly freed mass moves in the same direction as the rest of the moving mass, downward into the floor structures below thus adding it's mass an momentum to the original moving mass.

 

[uruk]

Bazant assumes that any/every part of the upper block is rigid = indestructible and based on that stupid assumption all the parts of the upper block just destroys anything in its way. It is craizier than the Judy Wood lazer beams destruction weapon.

The upper floor does not have to remain rigid to still cause damage because the mass still remains the same wether it is solid or disarticulated into its constituant components.

Since you are familiar with scales, try this experiment. Get a brick and measure it's weight. now break the brick up into smaller pieces and weigh the all the pieces together. Does the weight change?

The individual pellets of a shot gun cartridge are not physically connected to each other but they can still cause damage to a target when they are all moving in the same direct in close proximity to each other.

 

[Zipster]

Heiwa claims that the physics of the WTC falling has to be the same as the buoyancy that keeps a ship afloat and because of that, it should have arrested.

Ok, we’ll go down that road for a bit.

Buoyancy is achieved when the mass in the water displaces a certain volume of water (or whatever the liquid is, depending on density). So to “equalize” the gravitational force of the object and the “upward” force of the liquid, we established that a certain amount of liquid has to be displaced.

Now if we apply the same logic to the WTC, it would imply that roughly the same amount of volume as the falling upper portion be displaced before equalization can occur. However as the upper portion starts “sinking” into the lower portion, it’s displacing the volume, but at the same time, the floor that’s been displaced gets added to the mass that is “sinking”, increasing the volume that needs to be displaced to achieve equilibrium.

So once the halfway point is crossed, there is more mass up top than mass below. Thus it’ll continue downwards until it hits the much more massive Earth, where it’ll finally stop. As shown in what really happened.

The only reason massive ships don’t sink into the ocean is obviously because there is much, much more volume in the ocean than what is displaced by the ship. And that the pressure of the ship is spread out over a large area.

If we made the WTC towers water-tight and dropped it in the ocean, we’ll see that a massive portion of the towers would sink beneath the ocean surface before it becomes buoyant.

Of course, all this is lost to Heiwa. He tells us to not live in a world of "NWO physics" as he calls it. Yet he lives in a world where only forces being equivalent matter, material composition doesn't matter, where mass doesn't accumulate, but rather just "hinges" out of the way (what does that mean anyway??!).

What's his actual point in all this? Sure he's another Truther arguing that the WTC shouldn't have collapsed, but he never said what he thought caused it. Unless I missed it?

 

[nicepants]

Please - nothing becomes part of the originally falling mass. It remains constant while being sliced into smaller parts. Who is gluing new parts to the falling mass after contact? OBL?

Probably the same person who goes around gluing snowflakes to avalanches as they fall.

 

[alexi_drago]

No locally damaged floor of lower structure becomes part of the falling mass (of upper body). They just hinge down around the bolts of the unaffected side columns

From that alone we can safely assume that Heiwa has no knowledge of building construction whatsoever which now explains to me the whole pizza box thing.

 

[Heiwa]

From that alone we can safely assume that Heiwa has no knowledge of building construction whatsoever which now explains to me the whole pizza box thing.

Imagine a picture hanging on a wall. A falling body drops on the picture and chips off a piece of the picture, while the rest of the picture remains hanging on the wall. Does the chipped off piece become a part of the mass of the falling body?

 

[nicepants]

Imagine a picture hanging on a wall. A falling body drops on the picture and chips off a piece of the picture, while the rest of the picture remains hanging on the wall. Does the chipped off piece become a part of the mass of the falling body?

Yes and no...your wording appears to be (deliberately) incorrect.

The mass of the original falling "body" is unchanged". The falling mass increases because there are more "bodies" falling.

Falling Body + chipped off piece = falling mass

If this mass were to impact another picture in the same manner

Original falling body + first chipped off piece + 2nd chipped off piece = falling mass

 

[Heiwa]

Falling Body + chipped off piece = falling mass

If this mass were to impact another picture in the same manner

Original falling body + first chipped off piece + 2nd chipped off piece = falling mass

Is 1 + 1 = 1? Yes, in NWO mathematics! But I get it to at least two masses! And then three.

OK - so I drop three objects on something. Pls explain how they can impact something = 4th object at exactly the same time.