Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

[jaydeehess]

Only a few minutes left for lunch but let me try this

The upper section drops.
What does its mass impact? Primarily the load bearing columns of the lower section?
Not likely. If the columns fail and cause intial drop then they are quite obviously no longer aligned. Thus the mass is impinging primarily upon the floor pans.

How does a floor pan transfer its load to the vertical structural load bearing members? Via the trusses and truss seats.
What would be the normal load on a floor pan and its trusses and seats?
The load normally expected to be on a SINGLE floor pan.
How does the falling mass dynamic load compare to a normal load on a SINGLE floor?
It exceeds it by at least a power of ten.
How will this affect the acelleration of the upper mass?
It will slow it by a maxiumum of 10%

Will it be particularily obvious and if not why not?
No it will not be as the upper structure will itself flex and disintegrate.

How does the average acelleration of the collapse zone compare to free fall?
Its less than free fall by 10% to 15%

 

[uke2se]

People make mistakes...assumptions are wrong...etc...etc. My plane example fits...why flight test anything then?

But math isn't people or assumptions. Mathematical proof is the best proof you could ever ask for. Why do you trust your own (probably limited) experience over mathematical proof?

 

[Sunstealer]

Do you feel the same way about theoretical physics and maths? I mean, it appears to me that your problem is a general distrust of science.

It would appear that our friend is a member of the "If I don't see it with my own eyes it's not true/doesn't exist club".

 

[dafydd]

But why? Why don't you trust science? Why do you think that if you see it in a youtube video, it's more real than if you see it in math?

I think we know the answer to that one.

 

[uke2se]

I think the problem is almost none of the experiments that have been done...go against the official story.

Why is that a problem? That's good support for the official story.

 

[Sabretooth]

See my latest post above.

Really, for sheer entertainment , watch the video.

Wait, is he implying that the weight of the falling structure was apparently less as it fell, so it couldn't have been the reason for the total collapse?

w.t.f.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Holy Carp I literally laughed out loud near the end of tmd's latest video offering.

Yes, the apparent weight of a falling object is less, measured by a non-acellerating scale
WHILE THE object is falling.
HOWEVER!!!!
That is not where the increase in force comes from. In the video there are several instances in which one can see the needle pin to max when the weight hits while the author simply ignores this and wants us to note the decrease while the object is falling.

He says he is a professional engineer but seems to have slept through classes on dynamic force. While he does mention 'impulse' at one point he seems to wish its effect away.

Here's the thing;
if a falling object exerts less force at all times then anyone who believes this in invited to first place a 3/4 inch steel hex nut on their head and note its weight. No problem.
Now have a buddy raise it up 3 feet above your head and then let it drop at free fall upon your head and make note of the change in apparent weight (ie. as the author states this is the force exerted by this object)
As soon as possible come back to this thread and tell us whther the static hex nut seems to weigh more or less than the one that was moving when it contacted your head.

His last linked video is a great example of bad science. The conclusions he reaches from this experiment are all wrong.

The apparent reduction in weight is the result of rebalancing spring tension. The scale spring (potential energy) is being held down by the bowling ball, which is being held up by a string (potential energy). When the string is released the bowling ball is, in effect, allowed to stand still momentarily (object at rest) while the ramp is pressed upward by the spring in the scale. There will also be a horizontal component of movement (further affecting the position of the spring-loaded needle) as the ramp is shoved against a static weight. How much horizontal motion and in which direction will be dependent on the weight balance between ramp and bal.

 

[tmd2_1]

But math isn't people or assumptions. Mathematical proof is the best proof you could ever ask for. Why do you trust your own (probably limited) experience over mathematical proof?

Again why flight test anything then?

 

[dafydd]

Only a few minutes left for lunch but let me try this

The upper section drops.
What does its mass impact? Primarily the load bearing columns of the lower section?
Not likely. If the columns fail and cause intial drop then they are quite obviously no longer aligned. Thus the mass is impinging primarily upon the floor pans.

How does a floor pan transfer its load to the vertical structural load bearing members? Via the trusses and truss seats.
What would be the normal load on a floor pan and its trusses and seats?
The load normally expected to be on a SINGLE floor pan.
How does the falling mass dynamic load compare to a normal load on a SINGLE floor?
It exceeds it by at least a power of ten.
How will this affect the acelleration of the upper mass?
It will slow it by a maxiumum of 10%

Will it be particularily obvious and if not why not?
No it will not be as the upper structure will itself flex and disintegrate.

How does the average acelleration of the collapse zone compare to free fall?
Its less than free fall by 10% to 15%

Bringing numbers and physics into tmd's world? He only believes eejits on youtube.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

An airplane is considerably more complicated than a two or three ingredient chemical equation.

 

[dafydd]

Again why flight test anything then?

Why do you think they flight test? Take your time. Hint. Would you get on a plane that hadn't been flight tested?

 

[uke2se]

Again why flight test anything then?

Because aeronautics isn't based entirelly on mathematics. The basics of aeronautics is engineering which means math, but then you have to contruct and install parts, lots of people involved, lots of room for mistakes.

In mathematics, there are no mistakes, provided peer-review of course. In the simple mathematics we need for this problem, there are no mistakes, period. This knowledge has been with us for over a century.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Without a doubt this has all been tremendously in my favor. Almost all of this thread was devoted to molten steel, which is just one of my points. One I even said possibly to. Some were hardly touched, and some of the "debunking" was laughable. WTC 7 at least 6 hours early a mistake. Yeah if everyone knew that was coming down...why was NIST initially stumped took them 7 years to release anything, and when they did release something...they had something like our fires do not reflect what was visually observed. Any defense of that was laughable. Aziz, the doofus with the piece of the plane...photographed somewhere else..all laughable. Even the molten steel...most people saying it may or may not have been....that right there is reasonable doubt. So if I got the only point that was reasonably debated...to where it is at...what else can this thread by viewed as?

Serious question, are you drunk or using other mind-altering substances? I can't understand the connection between your answer and my question. I don't care about molten metal. I want a simple answer. Was there a lot of thermite or just a little? You do realize there's no way to construct a convincing argument unless you have an answer to this question?

 

[twinstead]

This has got to be the most elaborate "if I ran the circus" arguments I've ever seen

 

[jaydeehess]

You have no relevance...you can't see something silver hanging from a cylinder, trying to maintain that it was orange.

I said that the aluminum was orange as it fell just as the material from the south tower was.
I also stated that a great deal of contamination in the material would also greatly affect the colour of the material when heated(you brush that away with a wave of your hand)

NOW however I once again follow your command and watch a video and this time its such a complete balls-up of the forces involved I have to question the author's claim of holding a degree.

Now I did not take engineering, I took physics.

We had a little joke in physics;
What is the difference between a physicist and an engineer?(my apologies to all real engneers)
Answer:
Given the premise that all odd numbers are prime numbers conduct an experiment to prove or disprove.
Physicist:
1 - prime
3 - prime
5 - prime
7 - prime
9 - not prime
11 - prime
13 - prime
Conclusion: Obviously 9 disproves the premise.

Engineer:
1 - prime
3 - prime
5 - prime
7 - prime
9 - not prime
11 - prime
13 - prime
Conclusion: other than the obvious experimental error with one result the premise is proven and all odd numbers are prime

 

[tmd2_1]

I said that the aluminum was orange as it fell just as the material from the south tower was.
I also stated that a great deal of contamination in the material would also greatly affect the colour of the material when heated(you brush that away with a wave of your hand)

NOW however I once again follow your command and watch a video and this time its such a complete balls-up of the forces involved I have to question the author's claim of holding a degree.

Now I did not take engineering, I took physics.

We had a little joke in physics;
What is the difference between a physicist and an engineer?(my apologies to all real engneers)
Answer:
Given the premise that all odd numbers are prime numbers conduct an experiment to prove or disprove.
Physicist:
1 - prime
3 - prime
5 - prime
7 - prime
9 - not prime
11 - prime
13 - prime
Conclusion: Obviously 9 disproves the premise.

Engineer:
1 - prime
3 - prime
5 - prime
7 - prime
9 - not prime
11 - prime
13 - prime
Conclusion: other than the obvious experimental error with one result the premise is proven and all odd numbers are prime

Great rebuttal..you just proved you really do have no relevane....just blabbing on about prime numbers.

 

[tsig]

See my latest post above.

Really, for sheer entertainment , watch the video.

he seemed awfully interested in the weight when it was falling but not when it hit.

 

[uke2se]

Great rebuttal..you just proved you really do have no relevane....just blabbing on about prime numbers.

This is another of your problems, tmd. You aren't willing to listen to people who actually know their stuff. Instead you rely solely on someone who's working outside his area of expertise simply because he is on youtube.

 

[Sabretooth]

he seemed awfully interested in the weight when it was falling but not when it hit.

Truther Creed: When you find evidence that disproves your theory...just ignore it!

 

[twinstead]

This is another of your problems, tmd. You aren't willing to listen to people who actually know their stuff. Instead you rely solely on someone who's working outside his area of expertise simply because he is on youtube.

Confirmation bias ROCKS!