Fyziks 101

[Hokulele]

You need to actually try to comprehend the collapse, and stop being so worried about catching people in supposed contradictions.

But, but, that would involve work.

 

[beachnut]

Foolish logic. All this time, those steel columns were fixed and standing strong
on their foundation, and on 9/11 they felt enough magic to slide into the
bedrock, huh?

Again with this "dropped" crap. It was a solid length. Nothing fell from space.

You must be reading the NIST report which incorrectly depicts the tower
construction as a floor held by two posts?

It's more like this:

This theory about one floor hitting the other like pancakes doesn't account
for the inner core (blue representing 47 core columns), nor does it account
for the perimeter columns.

I really don't understand how the core buckled at a rate of 10 floors per
second; especially knowing the floor sections were tied between core
and perimeter every ~12 feet!

How can you post such tripe?

Solid length? You mean 1300 foot long?

No WTC is more like:

Then an impact 7 times greater than design. Did you know that? Guess you missed nist or you would be making fewer errors; maybe not.

Are you just an apologist for terrorist or 9/11 truth? Why is it, the terrorist, who supported the 19 hijacker murderers, are not supporting your FAILED ideas? Could it be UBL is more educated than a standard 9/11 truth false idea spewing member? YES, he is!

Why do terrorist understand 9/11 and take credit, and all you can do is prove failure in physics?

Second impact, at 2093 pounds of TNT kinetic energy impact, your expertise in cars is not giving you a clue for 9/11 issues. Got Physics, do you even understand it?


The floor reached and passed 10 floor per second at about the 52nd floor, below that it reached a peak speed making the drop in 0.072 seconds at the end.

But who expects p4t members to excel at math?

You do not understand becaseu you lack physcis, and think the columns were 1300 feet long.
Built slowly, the core was laterally supported by the Shell, by the floors being connect to the two, the core can not stand by itself. The wind would blow it down.

Remaining core on 9/11, fell.
NIST has a lot of photos.

Did you read NIST? How much can one floor hold?

When you read NIST, take physics, and stop listening to 9/11 truth groups like p4t, who have no theories, you could understand, or begin to understand 9/11. Good luck.

 

[WildCat]

By Jove, I think I've got it!

It all suddenly makes sense to me where Turbofan is going here - 1000's of missing feet of core columns, telescoping, core columns penetrating bedrock.

Turbofan actually thinks the core columns were rammed 1300 feet into the ground!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I for one am just dying to hear how he thinks the NWO pulled this one off! It's sure to make Judy Wood's space beam look like a tinker toy!

 

[ElMondoHummus]

But, but, that would involve work.

Hehe... yeah, heaven forbid that ever be required.

 

[X]

Because this hasn't been addressed yet.

Nope.

For the third time, it isn't compression. At least not at this stage. It is dynamic pressure. Dynamic pressure means there is no pressurization, per se, but instead it is all based on the fluid's inertia. Air, like everything else, has inertia.

You don't have to tell me it isn't compression, that's what your guys are spinning to explain the jet of debris shooting out the side of the building!

Mackey is quite correct.
Compression is not needed to explain the phenomenon. Dynamic pressure is more than capable of causing the observed effects.

And I now realize I was mistaken in my earlier comment, and that fans and pumps do not require compression to work (usually). Turbofans still do, though.

Again, no. Dynamic pressure. Not static pressure. And there is no "overcoming outside ambient pressure," since the static pressure is the same inside and out...

No, it's not! You just contradicted yourself. The pressure inside the building
will change once the upper level begins to move.

The pressure inside the building would become higher. Gas/Fluids move from
high pressure to low pressure.

Without a differential, fluid/gas flow cannot exist.

Do you understand the difference between dynamic and static pressure?
Mackey is quite kindly trying to explain it to you here. Allow me to re-post what he wrote below, with some emphasis added:

"Dynamic pressure. Not static pressure. And there is no "overcoming outside ambient pressure," since the static pressure is the same inside and out..."​

You will note that I italicized the word "dynamic", and bolded the word "static". You will note that the underlined passage refers clearly to static pressure, not dynamic. The two are not the same, and your failure to realize this is telling of your ignorance of the physics of fluid motion.

Below are two Wikipedia links, and (basic) definitions. They are links to webpages which explain, briefly, dynamic pressure and static pressure. I implore you to read them, and if you don't understand them, ask or PM, and someone here will be glad to help you through difficulties of comprehension (provided you show a willingness to learn something).

Dynamic Pressure: pressure felt due to fluid motion.
Static Pressure: pressure exerted by stationary fluid. Pay attention to the application of Bernoulli's equation, as well.

Is that right?

R. Mackey stated:

Again, no. Dynamic pressure. Not static pressure. And there is no "overcoming outside ambient pressure," since the static pressure is the same inside and out...

Do you believe the static pressure is the same inside and outside of the building
once gas flow begins?

I wasn't born yesterday my friend.

As Slayhamlet said, your inability to distinguish between two different phenomena is indicative of your ignorance of the subject.

Please note that you have bolded the same line I underlined above, to highlight that Mackey is referring to two different things here. Static pressure is NOT the same as dynamic pressure.

In fact, they are independant of one another.

It is easily possible to have dynamic pressure building and static pressure remaining the same.
But look at the total pressure.

You are trying to say that P_{0, 1} = P_static + P_dynamic and P_{0, 2[/sub ] = Pstatic (with Pdynamic = 0) are the same. They are not, and Mackey is not saying what your are arguing against. If I felt you were doing this on purpose, I'd call you disingenuous and ridicule your argument for a strawman. Instead, I hope you will read this post and leanr something, thereby fixing at least one small section of ignorance. And now I must run, or I will be late for my violin lesson...}

 

[pomeroo]

Squib = tiny explosives. The jets of debris you see shooting out the buildings
are produced by squibs.

I don't have a source, you'll have to take this explanation and live with it.

Try AE911truth.org for a complete breakdown of squibs and how they're used.

You've been caught lying again. Gage's dolts and charlatans apparently don't understand what the demolition experts keep telling them. In the phenomenon we observe in the videos, the plume of ejecta gradually expands, suggesting the release of compressed air. In an explosion, the appearance would be very different--a big burst that quickly dissipates.

 

[A W Smith]

Still waiting for an answer from everyone, especially

- Confuseling
- d'rok 3 times avoiding question
- SDC
- Newtons Bit Admits to avoiding response. Probably not schooled
enough to give a comprehenisve answer to the question
- uk_Dave
- R. Mackey
- Pomeroo
- Nicepants 3 times avoiding question
- Wildcat
- bje
- Mr. Herbert
- Anti-sophist- Beachnut
- Reheat

1) yours is an argument from incredulity,

2) you are asserting that the column tree telescoped. And asking us to explain it. This is a false choice logical fallacy and i will explain why.

3) you are using footage taken from over a mile away. You cannot tell if the columns are buckling toward the camera or away from the camera because you are only seeing two dimensions out of three. Also there is no way to see from this viewpoint if the portion obscured by buildings in the foreground if the core column tree is buckling from lack of horizontal bracing from the perimeter columns which are now absent.

 

[pomeroo]

lol

says the "amarican wannabe thinker" that judges religions based on a book he never readed himself.

you was on a TV show about Islam, and you had no clue about islam nor did you read the koran lol.

Irrelevant nonsense. I know much more about Islam than you do. Your fellow liar, the hopeless idiot Heiwa, has run away with his tail between his legs. You have been exposed no less thoroughly. What's keeping you?

If I can decipher your illiterate drivel, you seem to be claiming that I judge Islam on the Koran. I'm sure you think you're making a point, but I can assure you that, as usual, you aren't.

 

[pomeroo]

What's your take on the video?

Still waiting for an answer from everyone, especially

- uk_Dave
- R. Mackey
- Pomeroo
- Nicepants
- Wildcat
- bje
- Mr. Herbert
- Anti-sophist
- Beachnut
- Reheat

Stop dodging, start answering.

My take is that we are watching a gravity-driven collapse and you are an ignorant liar.

 

[pomeroo]

Wow, you're so good at twisting stuff around. Do you work for the Pentagon?

Replace single solid steel beam with "steel structure".

I'm pretty content with the replies thus far. It really confirms what I
already knew.



This makes absolutely no sense? The structure left standing suddenly
decides to break apart? Laterally unrestrained, so it decides to vertically
impale itself into the ground.

Go to bed believing all of this! Smile and wave as your stupid government
kills innocent people in IRAQ, AFGAN., and next IRAN.

Oh yeah, those wars were waged without linking proof to 9/11.

Again, I remind everyone that the common denominator for all of these ignorant morons is their hatred of America.

 

[A W Smith]

I can toot my motorhead horn too

Nicepants: I own a car that goes 0-60 MPH in four seconds. I build
cars that go 0-60 MPH in two seconds. I've been around cars that
go 0-320 MPH in four seconds.

So? I notched tubing and formed body panels and burnt my fingers shaping moly brackets on the belt sander from raw moly plate building one of these in 86 which won the north east division 1 championship in 87. We clinched it at the final race out of division at bowling green where i was the only crew member. And as a clutch guy for another team in 05 and 06 we runnered up at the Southern's in Atlanta both years and won at Lebanon valley. 05 we were #2 in division 1.

The car I built with the owner /driver/ fabricator came off of my drawing board and was one of only two cars when sold that was upgraded to top fuel. It Was sold to Bobby Lagana from Scarsdale as his first top fuel car. The only other chassis upgraded from top alcohol to top fuel I am aware of was when Billy Williams from Torrence upgraded his alky car to run top fuel.

But what does all this have to do with Fyziks?

Nothing telescoped or you would have seen it in the wreckage aftermath, No one was close enough to see through the dust cloud that was tens of stories high to see the manner in which the core columns collapsed.. its like holding your hand in front of the other and making silhouettes on a curtain in front of a light, without seeing behind the hand in the foreground. there is no available visual data to jump to conclusions. no mater high tall the index finger or the spire was.

 

[pomeroo]

"other columns failed from the heat of the fires"

NIST flatly states that 157 of 160 pieces of Steel they tested reached no more than 500 degrees.

There is zero evidence any impact zone steel MELTED(or failed from the heat of the fires). NONE.

Show me where in the NIST report they found melted steel from the impact zone?


Give me a minute, i better go check all my pots and pans from my Kitchen, some of those have been subjected to 500 degress of heat way longer than an hour.

Just got back, all my pots and pans are fine.

I'm a bit confused. You liars pretend that your imaginary incendiaries MELTED steel and then you ask to see where NIST mentions melted steel. Huh? NIST, as those of us who have actually read parts of the NIST Report understand, does not talk about melted steel. You liars talk about melted steel.

Now you're raving about pots and pans. Tell us why NIST shows temperatures well below the melting point of steel if the agency's nefarious purpose is to persuade us that steel melted. Steel begins to lose strength at around 400 degrees Celsius (750 degrees Fahrenheit). If you're telling us that your pots and pans have been heated to 750 degrees F for longer than an hour, you've been caught lying again.

 

[pomeroo]

The honest answer is, which you avoided, is that the NIST looked dilligently to find ANY steel that reached temps that would weaken it. THEY DIDNT AND COULDNT.

In lieu of the above fact, they again morphed the story to dislodged fireproofing as the culprit.

Because previous lies werent justifiable in relation to OBSERVED TEMPS.

There is a perfect reason why NIST continued to change its story on the collapses.
They dont stand scrutiny, and they are well aware of it.

Thank god we now have a shotgun shot into a box to explain how dislodged fireproofing is the newest culprit.

Just like a common criminal who continually changes his story and whereabouts while being questioned by police, becuase he figures a new lie will finally clear him, so the NIST has went down the same path.
They are unfortunately being asked to stand on an untenable slippery slope, and thus far have found little to no purchase on this slippery slope, which is the "Official lie"...Sucks to be them.


The NIST is exactly this...The poor lawyer being asked to defend for murder a client they are well aware is guilty.

It is amazing the lengths a stupid and dishonest person will go to prop up an absurd falsehood. In your insane fantasy, NIST undermines its own hypothesis, but the agency NEVER GETS THE IDEA TO FALSIFY THE TEMPERATURES IT FOUND. Somehow, thousands of serious researchers are available to confirm the "official" explanation that steel begins to weaken at 400 degrees C, but it doesn't occur to anyone to SIMPLY POSIT HIGHER TEMPERATURES.
You people are the most insufferable morons.

 

[jaydeehess]

Built slowly, the core was laterally supported by the Shell, by the floors being connect to the two, the core can not stand by itself. The wind would blow it down.

Actually Beachnut, if the perimeter columns and the floor spans had magically disappeared in an instant leaving only the core intact and pristine it would likely still buckle and collapse even if there was absolutly no wind.

,,,, and it would do so without the requirement that its columns either telescope into themselves nor drive themselves into the bedrock.

 

[GT/CS]

OK guys and gals, even though I have TF on ignore I've picked up enough of this to understand why he doesn't get it. TF please correct me if I'm wrong.

If all of you throw away your engineering and physics knowledge and look at this from a very simple point of view (that's not meant to be an insult to TF) it can be difficult to understand what happened to all those vertical columns.

I don't think TF is understanding the horizontal forces that were created by the collapse. He just sees vertical members suddenly missing, so what happened to them? They must have been pile-driven into the ground.

If you can make him understand how the horizontal forces acted on the columns I really think he'd get it. Oh, and it may help to not use 'lateral', or 'connections', or anything similar. Use 'sideways', and 'bolts', and similar terms.

Rememer K.I.S.S.

 

[nicepants]

If you can make him understand how the horizontal forces acted on the columns I really think he'd get it.

If Turbofan was currently capable of "getting it", he would have by now. As it stands, his desire to believe in a huge conspiracy prevents him from viewing anything 9-11-related in an objective way. This is evidenced quite clearly in his posts in this thread.

Make no mistake...truthers don't want the truth...they want $truth.

Where $truth = something more interesting than reality which more closely resembles the scenarios they see in movies.

 

[Corsair 115]

The columns were likely designed for a P-Δ that would be experienced from a wind event. I can't imagine this being more than one inch between the top and bottom of the column. A 5 degree tilt of a building 208 ft long results in a vertical offset of 18 feet, or 217 inchs and a horizontal offset of 19inches.

That's probably relevant, don't you think?

You're using math and technical data! Don't do that, you'll just confuse our resident conspiracists even more than they are already...

 

[Newtons Bit]

You're using math and technical data! Don't do that, you'll just confuse our resident conspiracists even more than they are already...

Well, one can hope to confuse them to the side of sanity rather than insanity.

 

[Corsair 115]

Well, one can hope to confuse them to the side of sanity rather than insanity.

A fair point, and a worthy endeavour, but based on the responses so far from the resident conspiracists, the effort would seem to be in vain.

 

[Minadin]

You people are the most insufferable morons.

I think that this statement is rather unfair, as you've apparently not considered the Holocaust Deniers and the Apollo Hoax Moonbats. In my opinion, it's a 3-way race.

Of course, it would be so much easier to differentiate between the groups if there wasn't so much overlap.