Computer modeling and simulation

[NutCracker]

Some of this brain-death, evil truthers really want, that NIST opens all data of their computer-simulations.

Why not just believe the former bush-government run agency?

Be a "Jref´ler".

why would they?

That's easy..so they can throw the full weight of their collective ignorance, stupidity and paranoia against it. If released, they would come up with all kinds of "wrongs", all kind of "anomalies" in the data. That's simply how Trutherism, JFK-ism, Roswellism and related nuttery works: the "official story" is all wrong and the more data you throw at them, the more "wrongs" they find and the more the "theories" diverge.

 

[bill smith]

I wonder what the legal situation would be if a group of scientists formed a coalition and demanded that NIST release to them the exact parameters and assumptions that they used to perform their computer model of the collapse of WTC7. This in the name of the public interest involved.

Could NIST refuse ?

After all NIST is a publicly funded body and there is no conceivable way that they could claim that those numbers had to be kept secret. This is a clear case of the public interest needing to be served and superceding NIST's desire to keep he data confidential. In fact NIST keeping this data secret appears furtive and raises the suspicion that they are not telling all they know. This has negative implications for the safety of hundreds or thousands of structures in the US and abroad.

 

[Justin39640]

I wonder what the legal situation would be if a group of scientists formed a coalition and demanded that NIST release to them the exact parameters and assumptions that they used to perform their computer model of the collapse of WTC7. This in the name of the public interest involved.

Could NIST refuse ?

After all NIST is a publicly funded body and there is no conceivable way that they could claim that those numbers had to be kept secret. This is a clear case of the public interest needing to be served and superceding NIST's desire to keep he data confidential. In fact NIST keeping this data secret appears furtive and raises the suspicion that they are not telling all they know. This has negative implications for the safety of hundreds or thousands of structures in the US and abroad.

i guess you misunderstood the words "proprietary" and "3rd party company"

 

[triforcharity]

Or, "not enought memory" or really, basic english for that matter,

 

[alienentity]

Hey bill smith. America is the land of entrepreneurs, free enterprise and such, yes?

There's absolutely nothing to stop the 9/11 'truth' movement from gathering up private funds, and hiring/leasing the expert programmers and equipment to create an independent model of WTC 7 and the collapse.

If your movement is really so inexorable and dedicated, as you claim, raise the money yourselves. Show some initiative if you really believe in your cause.

There's nothing stopping you. I say 'go for it'. Typical leftwingers, whining from the sidelines and expecting the gubmint to do your work for you...(wink)

The most comprehensive study has already been done, for the record. It cost a lot of money, and NIST employed the experts it thought could best do the job. Why would the government duplicate this work?

 

[bill smith]

i guess you misunderstood the words "proprietary" and "3rd party company"

Proprietary,adj...def. [Protected by trademark or patent or copyright; made or produced or distributed by one having exclusive rights]

I never knew that. I thought NIST was a public body and that all their data was being held in trust.

 

[bill smith]

Hey bill smith. America is the land of entrepreneurs, free enterprise and such, yes?

There's absolutely nothing to stop the 9/11 'truth' movement from gathering up private funds, and hiring/leasing the expert programmers and equipment to create an independent model of WTC 7 and the collapse.

If your movement is really so inexorable and dedicated, as you claim, raise the money yourselves. Show some initiative if you really believe in your cause.

There's nothing stopping you. I say 'go for it'. Typical leftwingers, whining from the sidelines and expecting the gubmint to do your work for you...(wink)

The most comprehensive study has already been done, for the record. It cost a lot of money, and NIST employed the experts it thought could best do the job. Why would the government duplicate this work?

Why shoulld we have to do that ? All that data has already been bought and paid for by the sweat of the American worker's brow. This is a bit like having money in the bank and them refusing to give it to you when you ask.

 

[alienentity]

Why shoulld we have to do that ? All that data has already been bought and paid for by the sweat of the American worker's brow. This is a bit like having money in the bank and them refusing to give it to you when you ask.

You don't seem to comprehend that the NIST report gives the parameters of and the outcomes of the models used. Using the same data again would produce the same result....exactly.
What's the point?

You need to create a different but equally comprehensive model and see what happens.

If you truthers want to put your money where your big mouths are, I'll personally contribute to the effort, provided the contracted professionals and organizations have a proven track record in the relevant areas.

Count me in for $15 bucks. And I'm not even American. If you can come up with $15 bucks from a million truthers, we'd have enough money to easily do the job. ($15,000,015.00, to be exact)

Contact me when you've arranged things. Until then, stop whining.

 

[bill smith]

You don't seem to comprehend that the NIST report gives the parameters of and the outcomes of the models used. Using the same data again would produce the same result....exactly.
What's the point?

You need to create a different but equally comprehensive model and see what happens.

If you truthers want to put your money where your big mouths are, I'll personally contribute to the effort, provided the contracted professionals and organizations have a proven track record in the relevant areas.

Count me in for $15 bucks. And I'm not even American. If you can come up with $15 bucks from a million truthers, we'd have enough money to easily do the job. ($15,000,015.00, to be exact)

Contact me when you've arranged things. Until then, stop whining.

We have exactly the same software that NIST used. Now we want the exact numerical data they input into the model along with any assumptions they made. Then we will run the model again and see if we get exactly the same outcome. We really really want those numbers. We really really want those asumptions. What does NIST have to fear by releasing them ? Can you yell me that ?

 

[alienentity]

We have exactly the same software that NIST used. Now we want the exact numerical data they input into the model along with any assumptions they made. Then we will run the model again and see if we get exactly the same outcome. We really really want those numbers. We really really want those asumptions. What does NIST have to fear by releasing them ? Can you yell me that ?

I don't know what the internal policies of NIST are. I don't know what legal rights and obligations are involved, referring to legislation etc..

Do you? And if not, are you prepared to actually find out this info, or do you just want to continue speculating?

 

[triforcharity]

BS (Oh, the irony of his initials)

Have you filed a FOIA request for that data?? Has ANYONE in your group done so??

It should be worded something like this.


Mr. NIST guy,

Could you please provide us with the numerical values that were imput into the model used for WTC 7?? Please?? Thanks.


I am sure that could get you started in the right direction.

 

[BigAl]

We have exactly the same software that NIST used. Now we want the exact numerical data they input into the model along with any assumptions they made. Then we will run the model again and see if we get exactly the same outcome. We really really want those numbers. We really really want those asumptions. What does NIST have to fear by releasing them ? Can you yell me that ?

Who is "we" and what software do you think you have?

 

[bill smith]

BS (Oh, the irony of his initials)

Have you filed a FOIA request for that data?? Has ANYONE in your group done so??

It should be worded something like this.


Mr. NIST guy,

Could you please provide us with the numerical values that were imput into the model used for WTC 7?? Please?? Thanks.


I am sure that could get you started in the right direction.

I know what they'd say....' No more Mr.NIST guy ' lol

 

[NWO Sentryman]

If modelling the Kennedy assassination can be done, then why not 9/11?

 

[deep]

Here's what NIST used for the LS-DYNA simulation (from the NIST report on WTC7):

Due to the nonlinearities in the analysis, as well as sequential local failures, a 25 s analysis took up to 8 weeks to complete. The analyses were run on a Linux cluster with a head node with two 64 bit, 2.4 GHz processors and 4 GB of RAM and eight compute nodes with two 64 bit, 2.6 GHz processors. Six of the compute nodes had 8 GB of RAM and the remaining two nodes had 16 GB RAM.
​

This is for those who contend that over 100 GB of RAM would be necessary, the hardware would cost millions of dollars, etc. The cluster described above could most likely be replicated with commodity hardware for under $20,000 (give or take).

Does anyone know if the demo version of LS-DYNA allows parallel processing? If so, is there an upper limit on nodes or CPU-cores?

 

[AZCat]

Here's what NIST used for the LS-DYNA simulation (from the NIST report on WTC7):

Due to the nonlinearities in the analysis, as well as sequential local failures, a 25 s analysis took up to 8 weeks to complete. The analyses were run on a Linux cluster with a head node with two 64 bit, 2.4 GHz processors and 4 GB of RAM and eight compute nodes with two 64 bit, 2.6 GHz processors. Six of the compute nodes had 8 GB of RAM and the remaining two nodes had 16 GB RAM.
​

This is for those who contend that over 100 GB of RAM would be necessary, the hardware would cost millions of dollars, etc. The cluster described above could most likely be replicated with commodity hardware for under $20,000 (give or take).

Does anyone know if the demo version of LS-DYNA allows parallel processing? If so, is there an upper limit on nodes or CPU-cores?

I don't know, but there seems to be a pending FOIA by AE911Truth for NIST's LS-DYNA models (see JREF thread here).


On Edit: You might also be able to get the full version of LS-DYNA for reduced pricing, although I think the NIST had to write a number of plug-ins (or whatever they're called for LS-DYNA) and you'd need to see about getting those also.

 

[alienentity]

Here's what NIST used for the LS-DYNA simulation (from the NIST report on WTC7):

Due to the nonlinearities in the analysis, as well as sequential local failures, a 25 s analysis took up to 8 weeks to complete. The analyses were run on a Linux cluster with a head node with two 64 bit, 2.4 GHz processors and 4 GB of RAM and eight compute nodes with two 64 bit, 2.6 GHz processors. Six of the compute nodes had 8 GB of RAM and the remaining two nodes had 16 GB RAM.
​

This is for those who contend that over 100 GB of RAM would be necessary, the hardware would cost millions of dollars, etc. The cluster described above could most likely be replicated with commodity hardware for under $20,000 (give or take).

Does anyone know if the demo version of LS-DYNA allows parallel processing? If so, is there an upper limit on nodes or CPU-cores?

You're right. not 100 gigs. 88 gigs.

I agree the hardware alone wouldn't be expensive. No idea what the software costs....and the programming? Not free either.

Like I said, 1 million truthers cough up a measly $15 bucks, you could easily pay for it.

Get working, truthers!!

 

[Justin39640]

You're right. not 100 gigs. 88 gigs.

I agree the hardware alone wouldn't be expensive. No idea what the software costs....and the programming? Not free either.

Like I said, 1 million truthers cough up a measly $15 bucks, you could easily pay for it.

Get working, truthers!!

exactly
bill i thought you wanted an "independent investigation model" lol
build it yourself

as far as plugins you probably mean scripts
and those might be private property

send an FOIA and ask them why it wont be released

i think youre kidding yourself about 20 grand though
it was 84 gigs the head node has a MB for 2 processors and 4 gigs
8 and 16 GB boards arent cheap and im sure those this is all high end stuff for their categories (6 x 8gb and 2 x 16 gb)
probably a lot of custom built cards and interfaces (which take custom drivers)
with custom workgroup software that isnt cheap either
id say you could get started for 100 grand for bare bones but it would end up being a lot more to build a reliable system

hate to spend a 100 g's for constant BSOD's lol

 

[Justin39640]

heres more info for you
check out the pricing for 16 gig kits
and this is consumer level stuff
http://www.google.com/products?q=ddr3+16gb+dimm&hl=en&scoring=pd

they probably spent 100 grand in DIMMs alone

 

[deep]

i think youre kidding yourself about 20 grand though
it was 84 gigs the head node has a MB for 2 processors and 4 gigs
8 and 16 GB boards arent cheap and im sure those this is all high end stuff for their categories (6 x 8gb and 2 x 16 gb)
probably a lot of custom built cards and interfaces (which take custom drivers)
with custom workgroup software that isnt cheap either
id say you could get started for 100 grand for bare bones but it would end up being a lot more to build a reliable system

I'm telling you that a regular Linux cluster with comparable hardware specs could be put together for less than $20,000, using commodity hardware. What custom cards are you referring to?