dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Whom should I believe? Scientists,engineers and people like beachnut or femr2,who has never studied physics? Gosh,that is a tough one to call.
Last edited:
Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Cuddles
- Start date
- Status
Whom should I believe? Scientists,engineers and people like beachnut or femr2,who has never studied physics? Gosh,that is a tough one to call.
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Then I am surprised* that you are not scorning the use of phrases such as *the energy to crush the tower comes from gravity*. A very poor statement.
* Seems to be simply an unwritten rule for you folks not to criticise each other
We don't have to because we all understand the basic principles involved.
Actually it's just as accurate as saying, for example, "the energy to power a rubber-band-powered toy plane comes from the rubber band" or "the energy to power a car comes from the gasoline." Instead of "...the tension in the rubber band" or "...the combusion of the gasoline" respectively.
That is to say, the meaning is quite accurate and clear enough if it's being read for honest comprehension.
Insisting on more technically precise wording will not make gravitational energy resemble thermite energy, demolition charge energy, mini-nuke energy, space beam energy, or evil-power-of-conspiratorial-malevolence energy.
Respectfully,
Myriad
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Then I am surprised* that you are not scorning the use of phrases such as *the energy to crush the tower comes from gravity*. A verypoortrue statement.
ftfy.
Written in that uncompromising style that can only come from a life of varied experience, a wealth of knowledge, rational thought and a sense of humour. I get it. I like it. Keep at it.
Could't have been directed at a more deserving charlatan who spends his life playing with video and models that point out 'pods' as anomolous attachments to the belly of an aircraft........despite the aircraft manufacturing world knowing them to be an essential part of the undercarriage. lol. Whilst shown to a 16 year old 1st year aeronautical apprentice who recognised them within seconds, femr2 spent years debating them on youboob as 'anomolous'. lol.
Discussing anything that remotely involves 'honest comprehension' with the charlatan is clearly impossible.......unless he can jemmy in an 'anomaly'. lol.
You certainly don't, have made that perfectly clear, and have dodged my questions again.
The hypocricy in the recent discussion is hilarious, but it's all in stone. I may refer to it at a later date
Yes, it's about correct use of terminology, a point that the likes of tfk normall apply the other way around.
Really very, very funny to see the group-think circle-jerk reactions of the locals when you are put in a situation where you should really be criticising one another.
*Yeah, it's wrong, but you know what they were trying to say, so shut up!* lol.
You (and a few others) have shown your personal level of understanding quite clearly over the last page or two, and it's very poor. Has made the repeated accusations that I don't know what I'm talking about drown in irony.
You certainly don't, have made that perfectly clear, and have dodged my questions again.
The hypocricy in the recent discussion is hilarious, but it's all in stone. I may refer to it at a later date
Yes, it's about correct use of terminology, a point that the likes of tfk normall apply the other way around.
Really very, very funny to see the group-think circle-jerk reactions of the locals when you are put in a situation where you should really be criticising one another.
*Yeah, it's wrong, but you know what they were trying to say, so shut up!* lol.
You (and a few others) have shown your personal level of understanding quite clearly over the last page or two, and it's very poor. Has made the repeated accusations that I don't know what I'm talking about drown in irony.
What was it you said about cracks widening? lol.
Resorting to snerk whilst wearing that nailed on hat. Cool. lol. Pose..pause......FAIL. RIP femr2.Akin to the personal level of understanding of the undercarriage of an aircraft. Most who make mistakes admit them............and don't repeat the mistake time and time and time again. lol.
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,320
Femr2 is correct Gravity is not equal to energy.
If truthers are corrected for using the term "free fall speed" instead of "free fall acceleration" then we should correct "debunkers" when they use inaccurate terms.
Using inaccurate terms is sometimes due to simple informalities in language.....other times it can be due to laziness....but often it shows someones lack of knowledge about a topic.
People who misuse technical terms often have only a very basic understanding of a concept with a lot of misunderstandings mixed in.
An example would be someone using "dB" instead of "dBm" to describe a signal level from a transmitter....I have heard fellow Engineers do this very thing and after talking about it the problem was not laziness or being informal....the problem was not understanding what those terms really meant.
We ask the truthers to be accurate, honest, and rigorous in their arguments and terms.
We should do the same.
If truthers are corrected for using the term "free fall speed" instead of "free fall acceleration" then we should correct "debunkers" when they use inaccurate terms.
Using inaccurate terms is sometimes due to simple informalities in language.....other times it can be due to laziness....but often it shows someones lack of knowledge about a topic.
People who misuse technical terms often have only a very basic understanding of a concept with a lot of misunderstandings mixed in.
An example would be someone using "dB" instead of "dBm" to describe a signal level from a transmitter....I have heard fellow Engineers do this very thing and after talking about it the problem was not laziness or being informal....the problem was not understanding what those terms really meant.
We ask the truthers to be accurate, honest, and rigorous in their arguments and terms.
We should do the same.
<tips hat>We should do the same.
Ironic that. lol.
Seems that 'thinking you know something' takes almost 10 years to achieve....erm.....................nothing. lol. Fancy videos and models and all. lol. Pose ..........pause..................................................FAIL! AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN. lol.
Irony? Is that what you do with your shirts in the morning?
If only yours wasn't nailed on.
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,320
No problem.
In this case I agree with you and I think people are letting their personal issues get in the way of being objective.
If someone uses a term incorrectly and someone else corrects them....we should support the correction, period.
Doesn't matter what someone has said in the past about other issues.....if they are right they are right.
Sunstealer
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 3,128
You are wrong - potential energy is stored energy.
http://physics.about.com/od/glossary/g/potentialenergy.htm
You have increased h in PE=mgh therefore PE must have increased.
Lets look at it another way
You are holding a ball 1m from the ground. Now walk up a set of steps to 100m in height. The ball is now at 101m from the ground. Therefore it's potential energy has increased. You have had to expend energy in order to do work to carry the ball up 100m. Similarly you had to do work to excavate the hole. Which seems fairly apt. I suggest you stop digging.
Why hide theories on 911? ... lack of evidence?
femr2 has the CD theory, tries to be covert about, naming his "studies", youtube videos with no analysis or comment, only questions, "Demolition". Questions, demands answers, a new investigation, because the original studies and investigations are too complicated, or what?
I was saying femr2 had not goal but he does. Asking questions.
for someone with a fictional covert CD theory, why does he projects his fiction to the "official story/theory"?
I would ask him if this is fiction. But his branch of 911 truth does no answers.
19 terrorists took 4 planes and hit 75 percent of their goal, and the murderers were stopped 100 percent when the rules were known. 911 figured out by ordinary people who stepped to be heroes, saying people they did not know. 911 truth spreading lies, with no care who they disrespect with no evidence claiming Demolition, and claiming the 19 terrorists, the official theory, called reality, is fiction.
911 truth void of physics and math, unable to figure out air ejections in the WTC are due to the collapse, the gravity collapse. femr2 thinks the air ejections are due to explosives, but will not discuss, or admit. If he applies physics to his "anomalies", he will be ejected faster than free-fall from 911 truth.
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,320
This conversation can quickly get into semantics and other areas of physics like cosmology and general relativity......
Without getting so deep into this topic that we start discussing things that will lose most people...including me since I am no expert in GR or Cosmology....
My point was that Gravity does not equal Energy.
I believe Sunstealer hit the nail on the head with...
The equation W = -Uf-Ui
Work is equal to the opposite of the change in potential energy....so when we are talking about gravitational potential energy on the earth we are really talking about energy due to an objects position in the gravitational field relative to the ground or "zero" level.
Without getting so deep into this topic that we start discussing things that will lose most people...including me since I am no expert in GR or Cosmology....
My point was that Gravity does not equal Energy.
I believe Sunstealer hit the nail on the head with...
The equation W = -Uf-Ui
Work is equal to the opposite of the change in potential energy....so when we are talking about gravitational potential energy on the earth we are really talking about energy due to an objects position in the gravitational field relative to the ground or "zero" level.
I didn't say it wasn't, I said the term is a bit of a misnomer. It's meaning is regularly misunderstood by those who do not understand the relevance of the frame of reference, which you can change at will, therefore, in context, changing the GPE without doing any work at all.
Of course.
Fine with that.
Not fine with that. Instead of digging, simply remove the cover from an already dug 100m hole. Work done in removing the cover != increase in GPE of the ball.
Again the point is understanding the relevance of frame of reference whenever GPE is discussed.
Last edited:
newton3376
The Truth Movement.....still not at 1%
- Joined
- May 16, 2009
- Messages
- 1,320
The terms force, work, gravitational potential, and gravitational potential energy all have precise mathematical definitions and gravitational potential is not the same as gravitational potential energy.
Just like electric potential or voltage is not the same as electrostatic potential energy.....
And of course we could model the earth as a point in space with equivalent mass and then use that point as our reference point to determine the gravitational potential energy (yes yes I know that technically the field strength varies and is not constant over the entire earth).......although people typically just use the ground
I think that such discussions might be a better fit for a different sub forum....
Just like electric potential or voltage is not the same as electrostatic potential energy.....
And of course we could model the earth as a point in space with equivalent mass and then use that point as our reference point to determine the gravitational potential energy (yes yes I know that technically the field strength varies and is not constant over the entire earth).......although people typically just use the ground
I think that such discussions might be a better fit for a different sub forum....
Carlos
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 285
The girder was pushed off its seat after the beams failure by buckling.
"Axial compression then increased in the floor beams, and at a beam temperature of 436 °C, [1] the northmost beam began to buckle laterally. Buckling of other floor beams followed as shown in Figure 8–27 (a), leading to collapse of the floor system, [2] and rocking of the girder off its seat at Column 79 as shown in Figure 8–27 (b).
So?
- Status