Hardfire: Physics of 9/11

[psikeyhackr]

Nope. But if the model is scaled properly, the wire strength would be a minor contributor.

You haven't addressed that "if."

I have never seen information of how the strength of each level of the towers was specified. I am not talking about what each floor slab was supposed to hold. What was the strength of the core and perimeter columns at each level?

psik

 

[R.Mackey]

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it isn't easy to find.

You have my final reply. If you want to make a model that isn't pure junk, you've been shown how to do it. I am not optimistic about your commitment.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Never-Never Land = 911 Land

Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it isn't easy to find.

You have my final reply. If you want to make a model that isn't pure junk, you've been shown how to do it. I am not optimistic about your commitment.

.
ROFLMAO

I knew you had stuck your foot in it as soon as you started talking about a scaled model. The entire concept of a 200 ton airliner leveling a 400,000 ton building in less than two hours is so ridiculous that laughing at it cannot possibly do it justice. You need to disparage any and all reasonable models because they will inevitably show that IT COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAPPEN.

psik

 

[twinstead]

.

I knew you had stuck your foot in it as soon as you started talking about a scaled model. The entire concept of a 200 ton airliner leveling a 400,000 ton building in less than two hours is so ridiculous that laughing at it cannot possibly do it justice. You need to disparage any and all reasonable models because they will inevitably show that IT COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAPPEN.

Yet so many in the scientific community do indeed believe that. How do you reconcile that to your declaration that it is "so ridiculous that laughing at it cannot possibly do it justice"?

This must be in your mind the worst 'conspiracy of silence' from scientists world-wide about the worst crime in US history.

 

[beachnut]

.
ROFLMAO

I knew you had stuck your foot in it as soon as you started talking about a scaled model. The entire concept of a 200 ton airliner leveling a 400,000 ton building in less than two hours is so ridiculous that laughing at it cannot possibly do it justice. You need to disparage any and all reasonable models because they will inevitably show that IT COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAPPEN.

psik

Physics and you are strangers; why do you fail to comprehend reality.

With only 315 TONs of TNT heat energy the fire from jet fuel alone you make idiotic statements like this to apologize for terrorist and shift blame to nameless bad guys that only exist in you delusions.

You ignore the impacts of jet aircraft an order of magnitude bigger than the design could handle.

You fail to have an appreciation for gravity and continue your failed delusional apologize for terrorists; the terrorist must be laughing at your failure.

0n 911 you ignore the jet fuel setting fires on multiple floors, and you ignore the impacts of the jets; you set your goal on delusions of washers and toothpick models and worse ignoring the help Mackey is giving. As you ignore the ground work you just wallow in lies, hearsay, and ignorance with Heiwa, and all the 911 engineers who can’t figure out 911. Failures.

You have failed models; you ignore the clues; and your post is funny as you laugh your AO rolling on the floor due to complete lack of knowledge on this thread topic. No that is pure ignorance in science.

Your complete disdain for science is clearly displayed.

You should ROFLYAO with only 0.001 percent of all engineers behind you. The fringe of engineers with nut case ideas on 911 are behind you, albeit they all have a different delusion, not really behind you at all, but all share the same disdain of science and share a failure in understanding 911.

 

[Crungy]

Yet so many in the scientific community do indeed believe that. How do you reconcile that to your declaration that it is "so ridiculous that laughing at it cannot possibly do it justice"?

This must be in your mind the worst 'conspiracy of silence' from scientists world-wide about the worst crime in US history.

Agreed. As a mechanical engineer who works with structural engineers in building design, including high rises, I've never heard any disagreement from the structural engineering community with the official reasons for WTC 1, 2 & 7 collapse.

Why is that only a severely disturbed late 40ish electrical engineer with a mental capacity and posting style of a socially alienated 14 year old bitter at his parents and teachers for not recognizing his genius can see da Twoof?

 

[psikeyhackr]

Physics and you are strangers; why do you fail to comprehend reality.

.
Oh yes, I can't comprehend that skyscrapers must support themselves thru their entire height and therefore the designers had to figure out how much steel to put on every level.

But I am not supposed to ask about that when an airliner crashes into a skyscraper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

I am supposed to have FAITH and TRUST in people too dumb to ask the obvious questions. Oh right, physics has nothing whatsoever to do with the distribution of steel in a skyscraper.

AMEN!

psik

 

[A W Smith]

I told you before psikeyhackr. Pick an upper and lower bound and work the MATH from there. Apparently you are unwilling and deliberately ignorant.

 

[Furcifer]

.
Oh yes, I can't comprehend that skyscrapers must support themselves thru their entire height and therefore the designers had to figure out how much steel to put on every level.

But I am not supposed to ask about that when an airliner crashes into a skyscraper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

I am supposed to have FAITH and TRUST in people too dumb to ask the obvious questions. Oh right, physics has nothing whatsoever to do with the distribution of steel in a skyscraper.

AMEN!

psik

Again you make no sense.

 

[Heiwa]

I told you before psikeyhackr. Pick an upper and lower bound and work the MATH from there. Apparently you are unwilling and deliberately ignorant.

Good idea! For every known structure A it seems to be impossible that a part C of it (C = 1/10A) and dropped on A can one-way crush A with negligible damage (no crush) to part C. Maybe it can be proved with real MATH?

I know that Bazant & Co have two differential equations to show that A in 1-D (a line) is crushed (shortened) by C (another line), but they assume that A cannot crush (shorten) C, so it is confusing. MATH is more logical than that!
Bazant suggests that when line A is shortened by a line C, it produces a line B that is 1/4 of the piece of line A that is shortened by C, and when B is 1/4 of total A, B shortens C to 1/4C, &c.

Mackey suggests that he can models these differential equations someway, but that scale is posing a problem! When did scale affect differential equations? Mackey works for NASA! Doesn't NASA know that you cannot crush A by a bit C of A??????

 

[twinstead]

I suppose when psikeyhackr, Heiwa and their 'movement' gain control, not only will all the debunkers be destined for the re-education camps, but all the scientists and experts from around the world who were obviously too afraid to admit that the building's collapses were impossible the way they were described by the NIST will probably be summarily hanged.

 

[beachnut]

.
Oh yes, I can't comprehend that skyscrapers must support themselves thru their entire height and therefore the designers had to figure out how much steel to put on every level.

But I am not supposed to ask about that when an airliner crashes into a skyscraper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0kUICwO93Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc

I am supposed to have FAITH and TRUST in people too dumb to ask the obvious questions. Oh right, physics has nothing whatsoever to do with the distribution of steel in a skyscraper.

AMEN!

psik

I know how much steel and concrete are on each floor close enough to do a good momentum model on paper which shows the towers could fall in 12.08 seconds in one case. I can't help it if you are model challenged and unable after 7 years to understand what I understood on 911. I must of listened in class and I respect science; you clearly have disdain for the scientific method and it shows in your shoddy research and failed models. Self debunking nonsense is your best product, I enjoy each post were you confirm your contempt for science.

I see you treat your beliefs on 911 as a religious like faith based on lies, hearsay, sloppy research, minimal math, shoddy physics, poor models, fantasy ideas, and pure opinion based malarkey. Your models prove this as you can’t estimate after 7 years the weight of each floor already done for you by another 911Truth want to be person as pointed out here to save you time. You can’t do the simple research after 7 years but you can whine and make up excuses for your own failed ideas by blaming me on some false charges and failed delusion of yours.

No you are suppose to look at the aircraft impacts and start your study based on science no your opinions and common sense delusions. You just want to be a no plane person? A failed engineer and physics like 911Truth offers as experts who only have failed nut case ideas?

You can come real close to the mass involves, but you may have to work at in instead of whining online about it.

 

[Heiwa]

I know how much steel and concrete are on each floor close enough to do a good momentum model on paper which shows the towers could fall in 12.08 seconds in one case. I can't help it if you are model challenged and unable after 7 years to understand what I understood on 911. I must of listened in class and I respect science; you clearly have disdain for the scientific method and it shows in your shoddy research and failed models. Self debunking nonsense is your best product, I enjoy each post were you confirm your contempt for science.

I see you treat your beliefs on 911 as a religious like faith based on lies, hearsay, sloppy research, minimal math, shoddy physics, poor models, fantasy ideas, and pure opinion based malarkey. Your models prove this as you can’t estimate after 7 years the weight of each floor already done for you by another 911Truth want to be person as pointed out here to save you time. You can’t do the simple research after 7 years but you can whine and make up excuses for your own failed ideas by blaming me on some false charges and failed delusion of yours.

No you are suppose to look at the aircraft impacts and start your study based on science no your opinions and common sense delusions. You just want to be a no plane person? A failed engineer and physics like 911Truth offers as experts who only have failed nut case ideas?

You can come real close to the mass involves, but you may have to work at in instead of whining online about it.

Good! Very good. Just produce any structure that performs like you say and we are in business!

 

[twinstead]

I don't remember if I asked you Heiwa, but what is your opinion of the fact that so few, if ANY, qualified experts have come to the same conclusion as you about the collapses? Do you think it's some kind of conspiracy of silence? Are they afraid?

 

[Heiwa]

I don't remember if I asked you Heiwa, but what is your opinion of the fact that so few, if ANY, qualified experts have come to the same conclusion as you about the collapses? Do you think it's some kind of conspiracy of silence? Are they afraid?

Topic is Mackey at Hardfire: Physics of 9/11. Why not ask him? He is not silent!
In my opinion structures do not collapse, if you drop a piece on them. In any scale. And I think most qualified experts agree!

 

[twinstead]

Topic is Mackey at Hardfire: Physics of 9/11. Why not ask him? He is not silent!
In my opinion structures do not collapse, if you drop a piece on them. In any scale. And I think most qualified experts agree!

Oh, so you believe most qualified experts agree with you? I don't mean to press or get off topic, but you appear to not want to discuss the fact your opinion is so much in the minority. Personally, I would be concerned if I felt so strongly about something but few who are truly qualified agreed with me.

 

[Heiwa]

Oh, so you believe most qualified experts agree with you? I don't mean to press or get off topic, but you appear to not want to discuss the fact your opinion is so much in the minority. Personally, I would be concerned if I felt so strongly about something but few who are truly qualified agreed with me.

Mackey seemed concerned. Trying to explain what happened. I wonder why NASA doesn't assist him with a simple model? Why this Hardfire show? And all this abuse! What's wrong with a friendly and lively discussion?

 

[Heiwa]

Model tips

I wonder what will happen if Mackey revises his model as per below figure. Upper part M consists of k m elements but only one m contacts the lower structure at impact!



What is happening then? What columns, if any, break. There are many columns between the m elements. Which element or columns breaks first (if it breaks) ... and what happens then!

 

[bill smith]

I wonder what will happen if Mackey revises his model as per below figure. Upper part M consists of k m elements but only one m contacts the lower structure at impact!

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_1826649d856573b309.jpg[/qimg]

What is happening then? What columns, if any, break. There are many columns between the m elements. Which element or columns breaks first (if it breaks) ... and what happens then!

Here's another perhaps less accurate model. It has it's points though.lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDHN1gBkx0M

 

[bill smith]

Heiwa, this could be interesting.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/19761

The paper ends with this sentence:''Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.''