The Heiwa Challenge

[Heiwa]

Question.

Is your above statement supposed to be a simplified description of the WTC towers? That the towers were the same all the way through from top to bottom?

If so, in my opinion, people should have a problem with your experiment as the towers were not the same as I have said before. In order to replicate the tower's collapse, I have suggested that the upper 1/10 of the structure include solid steel cubes to represent the transformers and 5 ton elevator motors located at the top of the towers. Why do you not want us to include this aspect of the structures in the experiment?

Someone came up with making a structure out of emptied eggs and then taking the upper 1/10 of siad structure and dropping it on the sturcture below. What if we added steel ball bearings to the upper 1/10 to replicate the 5 ton motors and transformers? Would that make a difference as far as what would happen?

Structure was generally the same throughout WTC Towers; floors and columns (columns getting stronger lower down). As part C of WTC 1 has mass say 33 000 tons, I doubt that an extra elevator motor 5 tons make much difference or 0.015%.

As part A of WTC 1 may have mass say 220 000 tons I have a feeling a 5 ton solid weight cannot do much damage to it.

 

[Heiwa]

That doesn't address the issue of scale. Think about it this way: If I throw a bullet at a watermelon, what happens? Now what happens when I fire a bullet at the same melon? Remember, the only difference in my example is scale.

Scale? It seems you change the velocity of the bullet in the two examples, while everything else remains same. In the Heiwa Challenge the impact velocity is 5.82 m/s corresponding to drop 3.7 m. See post #239. Adjust your structure accordingly.

 

[beachnut]

Scale? It seems you change the velocity of the bullet in the two examples, while everything else remains same. In the Heiwa Challenge the impact velocity is 5.82 m/s corresponding to drop 3.7 m. See post #239. Adjust your structure accordingly.

Does all the weight of the upper floors rest on the lower floor at the impact point?

Do you mean 8.52 m/s? Oops, there goes the kinetic energy up.

 

[boloboffin]

Yes, part C drops, if you remove its bottom supports, but what about part A? You are supposed to crush 56 sets of supports in part A + floors. You do not seriously believe that part C can do THAT?

Well, why wouldn't it? Part A in the original building is crushed, and as the video makes clear, all before any substantial crushing of C. I don't see any reason, if the 6 floors below part B didn't arrest Part C, why 60 floors below Part B would suddenly stop Part C at all. Part C gains more momentum plus the mass of the crushed floors as it goes down.

I hope that we don't have to get lawyers involved. There are an awful lot of witnesses here and your terms would be quite understandable to an impartial judge.

ETA: A second video of the demolition. The slow motion shows quite clearly that Part C is crushing Part A before being crushed itself. Why do you think Part A would have stopped Part C at all?

http://www.strimoo.com/video/12509995/Mort-d-un-batiment-MySpaceVideos.html

 

[TheRedWorm]

Yes, the only thing that scales in the watermelon experiment is the velocity of the bullet. But you didn't answer any of my questions, please do so:

That doesn't address the issue of scale. Think about it this way: If I throw a bullet at a watermelon, what happens? Now what happens when I fire a bullet at the same melon? Remember, the only difference in my example is scale.

Is scale important in the way physical reality operates, "heiwa," yes or no?

 

[Heiwa]

Well, why wouldn't it? Part A in the original building is crushed, and as the video makes clear, all before any substantial crushing of C. I don't see any reason, if the 6 floors below part B didn't arrest Part C, why 60 floors below Part B would suddenly stop Part C at all. Part C gains more momentum plus the mass of the crushed floors as it goes down.

I hope that we don't have to get lawyers involved. There are an awful lot of witnesses here and your terms would be quite understandable to an impartial judge.

ETA: A second video of the demolition. The slow motion shows quite clearly that Part C is crushing Part A before being crushed itself. Why do you think Part A would have stopped Part C at all?

http://www.strimoo.com/video/12509995/Mort-d-un-batiment-MySpaceVideos.html

Well, in this video you destroy three floors by controlled demolition and then upper part (C 6 floors) drops into this rubble and after a while contacts lower part A (6 floors) and both C and A are damaged. No one-way crush down takes place. This is exactly what happens in controlled demolitions.

The Heiwa Challenge is different! C<1/10A. Try one-way Crush down.

I have commented upon the Balzac/Vitry video at least 10 times.

 

[boloboffin]

Well, in this video you destroy three floor by controlled demolition and then upper part C 6 floors) drops and after a while contacts lower part A (6 floors) and both C and A are damaged. No one-way crush down takes place. This is exactly what happens in controlled demolitions.

The Heiwa Challenge is different! C<1/10A. Try one-way Crush down.

I have commented upon the Balzac/Vitry video at least 10 times.

You said it didn't matter that C is damaged, as long as A was destroyed. That's what you said.

But as we can all see, the Heiwa Challenge is Calvinball by any definition.

 

[Heiwa]

You said it didn't matter that C is damaged, as long as A was destroyed. That's what you said.

But as we can all see, the Heiwa Challenge is Calvinball by any definition.

Pls, try to do it yourself with C<1/10A . If you succeed you'll win a prize. Do not present what others do using controlled demolition.

 

[TheRedWorm]

That doesn't address the issue of scale. Think about it this way: If I throw a bullet at a watermelon, what happens? Now what happens when I fire a bullet at the same melon? Remember, the only difference in my example is scale.

Is scale important in the way physical reality operates, "heiwa," yes or no?

You don't seem to be very good at giving honest answers.

 

[boloboffin]

Pls, try to do it yourself with C<1/10A . If you succeed you'll win a prize. Do not present what others do using controlled demolition.

Maybe when you get all the rules sorted out, someone will want to play with you. Let's consider that your prize.

 

[phunk]

Condition is that structure of both parts C and A is identical and not different. You have to make part A a little stronger to carry part C, etc. as pointed out in the conditions but otherwise the structure should be more or less same in the Challenge. Now, back to the drawing board!

But parts A and C were not identical in the WTC. Part C had a large hat truss and lots of heavy equipment in it.

 

[Gamolon]

Structure was generally the same throughout WTC Towers; floors and columns (columns getting stronger lower down). As part C of WTC 1 has mass say 33 000 tons, I doubt that an extra elevator motor 5 tons make much difference or 0.015%.

As part A of WTC 1 may have mass say 220 000 tons I have a feeling a 5 ton solid weight cannot do much damage to it.

And there is where you are making a big mistake in my opinion. The research I have found so far reveals the following:

1. On the 101st floor or secondary machine room level, there were 6 M.G. SET & Starter components (names taken from the bluerprints) weighing approximately 4,150 lbs. a piece.

2. On the 102nd floor or main machine room, were 6 gearless motors weighing apporximately 8,500 lbs a piece (I have seen some reference to 10,000 lbs., but am not sure if this weight is for the local elevators or the express elevators).

3. On the 108th floor or secondary machine room level, there were 6 M.G. Set & Starter components at another 4,150 lbs. a piece.

4. On the 109th floor or main machine room, there were 6 gearless motors weighing 8,500 lbs. a piece.

5. In the 109th floor area there was an M.G. Set & Starter weighing in at 8,500 lbs. with a motor weighing about 10,000 lbs. for the #50 freight elevator.

6. Now comes the relay and control panels for the elevators. The relay and controller panels for the 101st and 102nd levels were a combined 12,000 lbs. The relay/dispatch/controller panels for the 108th and 109th floor areas was a combined 7,800 lbs.

All this comes to about 84 tons (short tons). So it's not just "one" motor. There are also two transformers that I see mentioned on the blueprints. I also see concrete pads and steel bracing. What about the window washing machine and track? Roof structure? I may be wrong, but doesn't 8,500# approx. weight listed on a drawing mean 8,500 lbs.? Doesn't the "#" mean lbs.?

If I am wrong on any one this, someone please point out my mistakes.

I find it hard to believe that if this stuff broke free, that it wouldn't crash through the steel beams below and sever connections.

So again. Why aren't you including something in your upper 1/10th of your experiment to be the motors, panels, transformers, etc.?

 

[Gamolon]

Structure was generally the same throughout WTC Towers; floors and columns (columns getting stronger lower down). As part C of WTC 1 has mass say 33 000 tons, I doubt that an extra elevator motor 5 tons make much difference or 0.015%.

As part A of WTC 1 may have mass say 220 000 tons I have a feeling a 5 ton solid weight cannot do much damage to it.

Your math doesn't add up either. if part A is 220,000 tons and part C is 33,000 tons, doesn't that make the totol tower weight 253,000 tons?

If that is the case, shouldn't 1/10th of 253,000 tons be 25,300 tons?

 

[tsig]

Damn, Heiwa added a no-removal-of-concrete-shore-ups clause to the challenge now? Our structures have to stand for 20+ years? The parking garage has to be complete? People have to die in the upper part?

Why don't you just cut to the chase? Unless its an exact replica of the WTC, and ends up in exactly the same shaped heap, it doesn't count.

The need for killing 3000 people kinda rules out an exact replication of the collapses.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Pls, try to do it yourself with C<1/10A . If you succeed you'll win a prize. Do not present what others do using controlled demolition.

Tell me again: Why was the Skyline Towers disqualified?

 

[tsig]

You said it didn't matter that C is damaged, as long as A was destroyed. That's what you said.

But as we can all see, the Heiwa Challenge is Calvinball by any definition.

It goes Calvinball one better: not only is there no rules there is also no way to win.

 

[Heiwa]

And there is where you are making a big mistake in my opinion. The research I have found so far reveals the following:

1. On the 101st floor or secondary machine room level, there were 6 M.G. SET & Starter components (names taken from the bluerprints) weighing approximately 4,150 lbs. a piece.

2. On the 102nd floor or main machine room, were 6 gearless motors weighing apporximately 8,500 lbs a piece (I have seen some reference to 10,000 lbs., but am not sure if this weight is for the local elevators or the express elevators).

3. On the 108th floor or secondary machine room level, there were 6 M.G. Set & Starter components at another 4,150 lbs. a piece.

4. On the 109th floor or main machine room, there were 6 gearless motors weighing 8,500 lbs. a piece.

5. In the 109th floor area there was an M.G. Set & Starter weighing in at 8,500 lbs. with a motor weighing about 10,000 lbs. for the #50 freight elevator.

6. Now comes the relay and control panels for the elevators. The relay and controller panels for the 101st and 102nd levels were a combined 12,000 lbs. The relay/dispatch/controller panels for the 108th and 109th floor areas was a combined 7,800 lbs.

All this comes to about 84 tons (short tons). So it's not just "one" motor. There are also two transformers that I see mentioned on the blueprints. I also see concrete pads and steel bracing. What about the window washing machine and track? Roof structure? I may be wrong, but doesn't 8,500# approx. weight listed on a drawing mean 8,500 lbs.? Doesn't the "#" mean lbs.?

If I am wrong on any one this, someone please point out my mistakes.

I find it hard to believe that if this stuff broke free, that it wouldn't crash through the steel beams below and sever connections.

So again. Why aren't you including something in your upper 1/10th of your experiment to be the motors, panels, transformers, etc.?

Nothing wrong. When ships collide they are driven by very heavy engines normally located in the aft end. Collisions most often concern the forward end of one and the side of the other vehicle, where the structural damages take place, i.e. local structural elements fail. Same for a vertical drop collision. All elements in upper part C drop but only those that later are in contact with part A gets damaged. A heavy object in part C far away from contact interface is supposed to be attached to its foundation where it is. It is not assumed to break loose, start to accelerate faster than the remainder of the part C and shoot through part A. It may happen, but then part C must stop and only sub-parts of part C move on, &c.

 

[Heiwa]

Your math doesn't add up either. if part A is 220,000 tons and part C is 33,000 tons, doesn't that make the totol tower weight 253,000 tons?

If that is the case, shouldn't 1/10th of 253,000 tons be 25,300 tons?

Or in this particular case, part A may be heavier? Anyway, in The Heiwa Challenge C<1/10A size wise and also mass C <1/10 mass A. But as I say in post #239, conditions can be changed, e.g. C<1/6A, to facilitate for contenders.

There must be a distinct size/mass difference C/A, while the C/A structures themselves (elements/joints) are same! Objective is then to show that part C can one-way crush down part A of same structure. Or that elements/joints in C can destroy all or 70% of the elements/joints in A.

Can you propose a suitable structure?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Tell me again: Why was the Skyline Towers disqualified?

Because it doesn't support the required conclusion.

Dave

 

[TheRedWorm]

That doesn't address the issue of scale. Think about it this way: If I throw a bullet at a watermelon, what happens? Now what happens when I fire a bullet at the same melon? Remember, the only difference in my example is scale.

Is scale important in the way physical reality operates, "heiwa," yes or no?

Whenever you get the time, "heiwa"