Hardfire: Physics of 9/11

[DavidJames]

.
That must be what qualifies him as a commercial airline pilot, right?

Balsamo hasn't flown a plane since he's become mentally ill and embraced the 9/11 CT's. Since he's no longer capable of flying, he changed careers to one of attempting fleece the ignorant and other mentally ill people.

You don't have to believe me. Go to his forum and ask him the last time he's flown and ask him why.

Will you do that?

 

[rwguinn]

.
That must be what qualifies him as a commercial airline pilot, right?

http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

It is certainly curious how you JREFers are constantly making personal attacks on people but it doesn't bother you that the NIST doesn't come up with OBJECTIVE DATA like the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of skyscrapers that supposedly collapsed straight down.

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

psik

"He was found in the wreck with his hand onthe throttle..."
Can't answer the question? DERAIL!

 

[beachnut]

.
...
It is certainly curious how you JREFers are constantly making personal attacks on people but it doesn't bother you that the NIST doesn't come up with OBJECTIVE DATA like the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE on every level of skyscrapers that supposedly collapsed straight down.
...
psik

Attack Balsamo? He is an idiot. He is not an airline Captain! No real need to point out he is an idiot; you can see his 11.2 G failed physics still posted and corrected with more delusions. You can't support any of Balsamo ideas on 911 so forget about it.

Balsamo could use Mackey's work as can you but you will not learn. Balsamo makes perverted sexual remarks when he attacks Mackey. If you were knowledgeable you would see all Balsamo's work is geared for the dolts who want to believe 911 was an inside job and they love the dirt dumb ideas of Balsamo and your delusions are a step up from Balsamo's junk but still delusions.

He never flew big jets; he sells implied lies about 911 on DVD. He is a fraud; can you figure out anything on your own?

Balsamo could learn from Mackay; instead attacks with pathetic dribble. Did you learn from Balsamo? He can't do research.

You can't find the weights to make your delusion work? I have seen many papers with good estimates of weights for the WTC. Plus if you would take the time (you wasted 7 years so far) you can study and figure it out. But you want to whine about it. Are you not able to do research?

 

[psikeyhackr]

Balsamo hasn't flown a plane since he's become mentally ill and embraced the 9/11 CT's. Since he's no longer capable of flying, he changed careers to one of attempting fleece the ignorant and other mentally ill people.

You don't have to believe me. Go to his forum and ask him the last time he's flown and ask him why.

Will you do that?

.
You realize of course that I will not be holding my breath until you supply evidence for your claims.

The amazing thing is that you do not realize how idiotic you make yourself appear by claiming what you cannot substantiate. It's the internet. Anybody can claim anything and everybody knows that.

You can of course build one of these and test it yourself:

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

psik

 

[DavidJames]

.
You realize of course that I will not be holding my breath until you supply evidence for your claims.

The amazing thing is that you do not realize how idiotic you make yourself appear by claiming what you cannot substantiate. It's the internet. Anybody can claim anything and everybody knows that.

You can of course build one of these and test it yourself:

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

psik

You don't have to believe me. You can make me look foolish by asking Balsamo yourself. He's mentally ill. He doesn't have a job, he's unable to fly.

Don't take my word for is. He has a forum, you can ask him yourself. He's a coward and fraud and you follow him. Go ahead sparky, ask him.

Will you do that or are you a fraud and coward as well?

 

[Swing Dangler]

It appears the brilliance of the great Ryan Mackey is spreading far and wide.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread445736/pg5

psik

BUMP!

 

[Furcifer]

I don't see what the big to do is about this. Usually yeild strength of a single member in measured in MPa, that is the amount of pressure required to deform an elelment acting over a unit area. There is a deviation in the member associated with a distance before this occurs. For purposes of simplification why can't we consider the amount of work done on the member (or more importantly structure) before deformation or failure?

Bump for Swingy

 

[psikeyhackr]

You don't have to believe me. You can make me look foolish by asking Balsamo yourself. He's mentally ill. He doesn't have a job, he's unable to fly.

Don't take my word for is. He has a forum, you can ask him yourself. He's a coward and fraud and you follow him. Go ahead sparky, ask him.

Will you do that or are you a fraud and coward as well?

.
I really don't give a damn about him.

The NIST spent 3 years producing 10,000 pages that can't tell us the total quantity of concrete in the towers and don't report the distribution of steel so that is sufficient FRAUD from an Official Government Source. Why Balsamo should concern you more than the NIST is beyond my comprehension.

You have already demonstrated sufficient mental instability to my satisfaction.

DUH! What does conservation of momentum have to do with a straight down gravitational collapse of a skyscraper?

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

psik

 

[TexasJack]

.
I really don't give a damn about him.

The NIST spent 3 years producing 10,000 pages that can't tell us the total quantity of concrete in the towers and don't report the distribution of steel so that is sufficient FRAUD from an Official Government Source. Why Balsamo should concern you more than the NIST is beyond my comprehension.

You have already demonstrated sufficient mental instability to my satisfaction.

DUH! What does conservation of momentum have to do with a straight down gravitational collapse of a skyscraper?

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

psik

Quit spamming your stupid video. Thanks.

 

[FineWine]

.
I really don't give a damn about him.

The NIST spent 3 years producing 10,000 pages that can't tell us the total quantity of concrete in the towers and don't report the distribution of steel so that is sufficient FRAUD from an Official Government Source. Why Balsamo should concern you more than the NIST is beyond my comprehension.

You have already demonstrated sufficient mental instability to my satisfaction.

DUH! What does conservation of momentum have to do with a straight down gravitational collapse of a skyscraper?

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

psik

What do you mean by "the distribution of the steel"?

 

[beachnut]

.
I really don't give a damn about him.

The NIST spent 3 years producing 10,000 pages that can't tell us the total quantity of concrete in the towers and don't report the distribution of steel so that is sufficient FRAUD from an Official Government Source. Why Balsamo should concern you more than the NIST is beyond my comprehension.

You have already demonstrated sufficient mental instability to my satisfaction.

DUH! What does conservation of momentum have to do with a straight down gravitational collapse of a skyscraper?

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

psik

Momentum transfer shows the collapse time. You can do it with estimated mass of each floor.

If you look on the forum you will find some good estimates of the WTC per floor accounting for the different grades of steel used. You are right there is thick steel at the base and thin steel at the top. The exterior also had different grades of steel to make the building strong for lateral loads. I think it varied according to stress models; it was amazingly strong structure and would have repelled an aircraft impact at 180 mph with only minor local damage and fires.

If I have time I will find Greg's work on weight but save the time, and PM Greg and he will give you his work. Greg U did what you need. I think his estimate is light on mass. There is a recent version from another truther. I will look it up! But I don't have time now, it could take weeks. But the guy was talked about here! This thread! He as a spread sheet of weights; just like Greg; between them you could do your own estimates.

Good luck. Was that your washer stuff? You could model the collapse of the WTC with the proper washer model. Good luck.

You have already demonstrated sufficient mental instability to my satisfaction.

Why not work on a new model and show us all up? Good luck.

So PM greg, and look in this thread for the guy who has a model and he has as good as Greg on the weights; what would Greg say? Have a great weekend, it is going to be 80 here and great weather!

 

[Furcifer]

.
My toothpicks are the same strength all of the way down. The WTC had to get stronger all of the way down.

psik

FAIL. You don't even know what your model is modelling.

Higher education isn't about teaching, it's about learning. You get evaluated by demonstrating your level of understanding. It's pretty clear what you problem is, you make claims you understand things but fail to demonstrate.

Care to defend the article you linked? Somehow I doubt it. You like to read what others wrote, regurgitate it, then claim you understand the principles. When pressed, you continually fail to defend. I'd say you're fairly well read, but comprehension isn't your strong point.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Quit spamming your stupid video. Thanks.

.
Provide a link to another one that demonstrates the effects of conservation of momentum in a gravitational collapse.

Or ignore my posts. Thanks

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

psik

 

[Heiwa]

.
Provide a link to another one that demonstrates the effects of conservation of momentum in a gravitational collapse.

Or ignore my posts. Thanks

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

psik

Nice show! A dropping part C mass (solid) that only has to break joints (match sticks/toothpicks) in a part A below is evidently slowed down by the energy losses due to deform, fracturing and breaking the A joints.

It is worthwhile to note that breaking an A joint does not break anything in dropping part C mass.

When the same dropping part C mass also have to accelerate extra masses on top of an A joint before breaking the joint, again the process is slowed down by these energy losses, even if extra masses are then added to part C at each A joint breakage (part C pushes the extra A masses in front of itself).

Again it is worthwhile to note that the extra A mass does not break anything in dropping part C mass.

A refined test would be that part C just pushes the extra A masses aside (and out of the system) and that the extra A masses are not added to part C contacting next A mass/joint. Then the process will be even slower.

A further refinement is to model part C as a number of C masses connected by match stick joints, i.e. part C becomes less solid and more springy. At first contact with an A mass/joint assembly, it could be that it is the lowest C mass/joint assembly that breaks and that part C is demolished ... by itself.

Thanks again for the show!

 

[ozeco41]

Nice show! A dropping part C mass (solid) that only has to break joints (match sticks/toothpicks) in a part A below is evidently slowed down by the energy losses due to deform, fracturing and breaking the A joints. ....

Correct - that is 2/3rds of what happened at WTC 1 & 2

It is worthwhile to note that breaking an A joint does not break anything in dropping part C mass.

..it doesn't matter whether it breaks or not - the falling weight is what breaks the next level.

When the same dropping part C mass also have to accelerate extra masses on top of an A joint before breaking the joint, again the process is slowed down by these energy losses, even if extra masses are then added to part C at each A joint breakage (part C pushes the extra A masses in front of itself).

You really do understand Heiwa - only one barrier to you seeing it clearly. The energy of the total falling mass was far in excess of what was needed to break the toothpicks of the floor joist to column connections (plus the necessary parallel explanation for the core). Psikey is perfectly correct on that part of the principle.

Again it is worthwhile to note that the extra A mass does not break anything in dropping part C mass.

Probably not worth "noting" given that "..it doesn't matter whether it breaks or not - the falling weight is what breaks the next level..."

A refined test would be that part C just pushes the extra A masses aside (and out of the system) and that the extra A masses are not added to part C contacting next A mass/joint. Then the process will be even slower.

Your requirement for a "miracle" does not help. No deity will intervene to push stuff "aside (and out of the system)"

A further refinement is to model part C as a number of C masses connected by match stick joints, i.e., part C becomes less solid and more springy. At first contact with an A mass/joint assembly, it could be that it is the lowest C mass/joint assembly that breaks and that part C is demolished ... by itself.

Whilst your attempt to divert this to a "proof" of your nonsense claims the reality is still that "..it doesn't matter whether it breaks or not - the falling weight is what breaks the next level..."

Thanks again for the show!

Agreed. A worthwhile demonstration for this issue - a few points I disagree with but it was not targeted to my needs.

 

[Heiwa]

Whilst your attempt to divert this to a "proof" of your nonsense claims the reality is still that "..it doesn't matter whether it breaks or not - the falling weight is what breaks the next level..."

In the psikeyhackr model the moving spacers - the part C mass - (actually a dynamic force) are kept in position by the vertical wooden rod to ensure that the dynamic force is applied again and again on some poor A masses/joints. In reality the dynamic force should miss the second A mass/joint, but this is a model to show that the dynamic force becomes zero after a while = arrest.

Note that the dynamic force only exists, while part C mass is in contact with an A mass/joint. Between contacts the dynamic force is zero, as C mass is in free fall again.

At every contact C mass/A mass/joint there is a jolt, retardation of C mass, so that the dynamic force can accelerate the A mass and break the A joint.

Very good model! Should be filmed with a high speed camera to show all these exciting events at a collision.

 

[beachnut]

.
Provide a link to another one that demonstrates the effects of conservation of momentum in a gravitational collapse.

Or ignore my posts. Thanks

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

psik

Why are you off topic and spamming?

Your model has to model the fact that a floor in the WTC can only hold itself and 11 more floors statically (check my numbers, but I am close).

In the model you must find the number of washer/floors that make the toothpick fail statically with the mass of 12 floors. This is the mass to drop on the floors below. And then in the other tower model take the 20 or so floors based on the ration of static 12 failure and do that drop.

The fact is the WTC fell as seen without explosive and no thermite. What did you model say?

...
Very good model! Should be filmed with a high speed camera to show all these exciting events at a collision.

Failed model; sad you can't see it. But then you have your pizza box engineering delusion.

 

[ozeco41]

In the psikeyhackr model the moving spacers - the part C mass - (actually a dynamic force) are kept in position by the vertical wooden rod to ensure that the dynamic force is applied again and again on some poor A masses/joints. ...

Yes ... all he needs to do to model WTC conditions is to drop a 10 or 20 washer load on to a series of single washer floors

AND reduce the strength of the toothpicks to ones which hold 5 washers and fail with (say 7-8-9-10). and you have the "outer tube floors of WTC"

In reality the dynamic force should miss the second A mass/joint

,....err ....Why??

but this is a model to show that the dynamic force becomes zero after a while = arrest.

... sure that is psikeys preset belief system BUT put the scaling factor right as I have just explained - you don't actually need to run the model it is self evident.

Just as "The global collapse was inevitable" is self evident to NIST and any competent engineer who gives it a few seconds thought. Don't even need the sums - the numbers are "overwhelming"

...and anyone can see that overloaded 10 times breaking and overloaded 20 times breaking have one thing in common.

It breaks.

Note that the dynamic force only exists, while part C mass is in contact with an A mass/joint. Between contacts the dynamic force is zero, as C mass is in free fall again.

How come you understand that here in this thread but argue the opposite against me in another thread?

...At every contact C mass/A mass/joint there is a jolt, retardation of C mass, so that the dynamic force can accelerate the A mass and break the A joint.

Yup except that the jolt is a little one - too small to be detected in a macro examination of videos much to the should be embarrassment of another truther posting here using the term "Jolt".

Very good model! Should be filmed with a high speed camera to show all these exciting events at a collision.

...preferably after calibration of washers and toothpicks to match WTC Tower criteria.

 

[Heiwa]

Why are you off topic and spamming?

The psikeyhackr model with washers/toothpicks is exactly what Mackey asks for! A mass M (part C - very solid, unfortunately) that contacts a number of smaller m - washers - (part A), whose supports (toothpicks) are supposed to break, so that mass M can crush all of them in a one-way crush down.

But in the psikeyhackr model mass M stops after a while. Just a partial 'collapse' takes place, but it is a good model. I like it. As I said above, the part C with 20 washers stacked on top of each other is not really representative of the part A below that it crushes, but that can be adjusted in an improved model.

At http://the911forum.freeforums.org/crush-down-models-t145.html the same subject is discussed, where Benson, an associate of Bazant, is promoting a structure of parts C and A with floors of ceramic tiles and columns of soda sipping straws, SSS, that are glued together. This funny contraption is supposed to prove one-way crush down.

Anyway, part C cannot one-way crush down part A, because part C crushes itself first. Happens every time!

 

[TexasJack]

.
Provide a link to another one that demonstrates the effects of conservation of momentum in a gravitational collapse.

Or ignore my posts. Thanks



psik

You mean like you ignoring Newton's Bit question:

You didn't answer my question: why is it necessary. Why MUST you know the weight of something that even if your ballpark is off by 100% it only affects the entire mass of the structure by 0.01%?

Too tough for you?