My professors thought well enough of my physics knowledge to give me good grades.
Did you cheat off of the students who actually understood physics?
My professors thought well enough of my physics knowledge to give me good grades.
It also wouldn't do anything. Buildings aren't homogeneous objects. They don't have a single natural frequency that will result in resonance when excited by a tiny force. One mode might excite, but another mode will damp.
Just asking, has any troll dropped by JREF for a while and then put a public seminar on the JREF calender to more fully expose their data to JREF scrutiny? I'm guessing it might be a first.
My professors thought well enough of my physics knowledge to give me good grades.
Since momentum is a function of both mass AND velocity, it really doesn't tell you much to know how fast something is moving, anyway.
How much would it hurt if a boat pinned you to a dock at 1 mph? A rowboat, not so much. An ocean liner...squish.

What is the 'Flux' and where would I find it ?
Either that, or what I say about my results is true and I actually intend to do the seminar on December 1st.
Just asking, has any troll dropped by JREF for a while and then put a public seminar on the JREF calender to more fully expose their data to JREF scrutiny? I'm guessing it might be a first.
My question to you is "how long would it have taken these concrete floors you speak of to fall twelve feet?"
And even if they had, they wouldn't have generated metallic foam.
Here you go:
Dysentery (formerly known as flux or the bloody flux) is an inflammatory disorder of the intestine, especially of the colon, that results in severe diarrhea containing mucus and/or blood in the feces[1] with fever and abdominal pain.[2] If left untreated, dysentery can be fatal.
My professors thought well enough of my physics knowledge to give me good grades.
Some consider the 'Flux' to be a pool or resource of human knowledge that we all stand in uo to our waists, and which connects us..
...bla bla bla, ginger... bla bla bla... Star Wars Defense Initiative, but Ronald Reagan came up with that name, not Dr. Wood.
I can't expect them to recognize a tiny object in a person's hand,
This is an asinine question. You're again on the road to another call to perfection fallacy. There is ample direct evidence, not worth discussing. You're wasting everybody's time with dumb questions like that.Can you give me any direct evidence of the hijackings on 9/11? I've been asking for them on another thread.
Metallic foam disproves airplane crashes.
So how do you account for the hundreds of eyewitnesses, both at the WTC and the Pentagon and in Shanksville who all saw PLANES either fly into the buildings or crash into the ground?
And I'm not talking about the people who saw it on TV; I'm talking about the people who were physically THERE, on site, and who all described planes in their eyewitness testimony. You said in another thread you'd accept eyewitness testimony as evidence of hijackings; there are literally hundreds of witnesses to the planes hitting the buildings and crashing in the field. After the first plane hit, nearly everyone in downtown Manhattan was staring on an almost constant basis at the WTC complex, from varying distances. I have yet to hear of one who denied having seen an airplane that was in line of sight of the airplane's trajectory as it plowed into the South Tower. As for witnesses to the first plane; do you discount the word of several reputable first responders who actually SAW it happen? Watch the Naudet documentary; it contains footage of the very real plane smashing into a tower and the firefighters' reactions to it. And if you handwave away the video, then I suggest you go and actually SPEAK to the firefighters who witnessed it; I can't recall the ladder number offhand, but I'm sure someone here can remember it, as well as the names of the firefighters in question. I'm pretty sure they'll tell you they saw a PLANE hit the towers.
Metallic foam, from gravity? WEEOOWEEOOWEEOO! Alarms going off.
When you claim that the length of time that the debris pile was smoldering ("fuming " as you say) is atypical, what are you basing that claim on?
In other words, what are you comparing to that you would consider a typical length of time for an underground fire to burn?
The essence of science can be simple comparisons.
Compare this event that is called a plane crash on 9/11? Does the damage appear similar or different to other instances of planes crashing into buildings?
Compare my samples to other known WTC dust samples. Are they similar or different to these samples?
Smoke behaves very differently from these fumes AND I smelled them, so I know what I'm talking about from a direct observation's standpoint.
They don't make this much dust, and it doesn't last for a year.