Hardfire: Physics of 9/11

[A W Smith]

I don't claim no-planes because it eems more logical that they would hhave used real planes. Still, many factors including the post you are eplying to point to a no-plane scenario. So I don't claim anything and just examine the evidence and wherever it lead, it leads.

stop lying bill. you are a no planer. it cannot be more obvious

Watch this video through from about 50 seconds and see the plane strike he building. Do you see any kind of shockwave ? Select any point where you would expect to see some reaction of the building to the brute force of the impact. Did the left engine hit first ? If so why did we see no rotation of the tail ?
Given he power of the impact that made the building sway , why did the plane not burst on impact ? How did the delicate nose penetrate steel box columns without deforming ? (

 

[dtugg]

I don't claim no-planes because it eems more logical that they would hhave used real planes. Still, many factors including the post you are eplying to point to a no-plane scenario. So I don't claim anything and just examine the evidence and wherever it lead, it leads.

There are no factors whatsoever that point to no planes at the WTC. It is a fantasy created by very ignorant, crazy, and stupid people. But anyways, it appears that yes, you are a no planer. Have fun being you.

 

[bill smith]

Bill, Stop being profoundly ignorant. You are in way over your head here.The tail of the plane isn't going to make a sudden turn because one engine may contact the structure before the first. at 540 mph Ever hear of inertia bill? And when have you seen a flame front from a fireball propagate faster than 540 mph? especially reverse of the planes direction? And do you really expect to see a shock wave of less than two percent from a video?

Don't forget that if he left engine touched first the left wingtip touched before that giving plenty of time for visible rotation.

You know when you see a fleeting expression cross somebody's face ? It happens so fast it is come and gone in a split second. But you DO know what you saw. The same when the plane impacted the steel columns so hard. The shockwave should have run out across the face of the building like that expression...like ripples in a pool. The face of the buildng should have shimmied. This didn't happen and in my opinion is one of those things that point to the no-plane scenario. And I would like you to comment on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPR0hw-mqnk&feature=related 5-6 at 50 seconds +/-

 

[dtugg]

This didn't happen and in my opinion is one of those things that point to the no-plane scenario. And I would like you to comment on this.

Your opinion means nothing and is based upon nothing but your profound ignorance.

 

[tsig]

Don't forget that if he left engine touched first the left wingtip touched before that giving plenty of time for visible rotation.

You know when you see a fleeting expression cross somebody's face ? It happens so fast it is come and gone in a split second. But yu DO know what you saw. The same when the plane impcted the steel columns so hard. The shockwave should have run out across the face of the building like that expression...like ripples in a pool. The face of the buildng should have shimmied. This didn't happen and in my opinion is one of those things that point to the no-plane scenario. And I would like you to comment on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPR0hw-mqnk&feature=related 5-6 at 50 seconds +/-

Heiwa's got it bouncing and you have it shimmying. Will you have them doing the Charlston next?

At this point your opinion is a contraindication of facts.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Depends, what are you trying to model?

.
The straight down gravitational collapse. I think it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE, but this 9/11 psychosis has gripped the planet.

I'm thinking if I cut the cardboard tubes from toilet tissue rolls down to 1 inch lengths and use them as supports between the hard drives they would provide crushable supports to resist the falling mass. The hard drives would provide the inertial mass. I could even use hard drives separated by toilet roll tubes for my falling mass to collapse upon itself like the top of the north tower had to.

psik

 

[dtugg]

.
The straight down gravitational collapse. I think it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE, but this 9/11 psychosis has gripped the planet.

I'm thinking if I cut the cardboard tubes from toilet tissue rolls down to 1 inch lengths and use them as supports between the hard drives they would provide crushable supports to resist the falling mass. The hard drives would provide the inertial mass. I could even use hard drives separated by toilet roll tubes for my falling mass to collapse upon itself like the top of the north tower had to.

psik

You actually your stupid little model compares in any way to the WTC? Wow, you are almost as bad as Heiwa!

 

[twinstead]

Don't forget that if he left engine touched first the left wingtip touched before that giving plenty of time for visible rotation.

You know when you see a fleeting expression cross somebody's face ? It happens so fast it is come and gone in a split second. But you DO know what you saw. The same when the plane impacted the steel columns so hard. The shockwave should have run out across the face of the building like that expression...like ripples in a pool. The face of the buildng should have shimmied. This didn't happen and in my opinion is one of those things that point to the no-plane scenario. And I would like you to comment on this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPR0hw-mqnk&feature=related 5-6 at 50 seconds +/-

You don't seem to be getting it. Just because you THINK the face of the building should have shimmied, and you didn't see it in a youtube video, means absolutely nothing. In other words, and with the upmost respect, what you say SHOULD have happend, and what say you SHOULD have seen, is worthless.

 

[A W Smith]

Don't forget that if he left engine touched first the left wingtip touched before that giving plenty of time for visible rotation.

plenty of time bill? Really? im gonna throw out a number bill. I want you to tell me what it represents. are you ready?

.0012626 seconds

thats point zero zero one two six two six seconds.

What does that represent billl?

 

[bill smith]

.
The straight down gravitational collapse. I think it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE, but this 9/11 psychosis has gripped the planet.

I'm thinking if I cut the cardboard tubes from toilet tissue rolls down to 1 inch lengths and use them as supports between the hard drives they would provide crushable supports to resist the falling mass. The hard drives would provide the inertial mass. I could even use hard drives separated by toilet roll tubes for my falling mass to collapse upon itself like the top of the north tower had to.

psik

I really like your videos. Is this a practical model ?


Take 240 long spaghetti sticks to act as as the perimeter columns with an aditional 47 x 4 sticks to represent the stronger core spaced in a rectangle to cover about 60& of the centre of the structure. Then you have 110 x compressed glue and superfine sugar floors made to scale with holes drilled to correspond to the column locations. Then each floor is carefully slid down over he spaghetti columns and glued into position corresponding to the 110 floors of the WTC Towers. Allow to dry. Then anchor the columns in a solid surface. Allow to dry.

Finally lift up the top (and lightest) 10% of the model and drop it say 6'' onto the lower 90%. Then go and get a takeaway because you will not tbe having spaghetti for dinner.

 

[Toke]

The straight down gravitational collapse. I think it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE, but this 9/11 psychosis has gripped the planet.

I guess your alternative collapse would look like a tree falling.

Buildings are not trees.
Even i can figure out that when a building start tipping the whole load will be on the turning point*. That is too much, it will fail and the building starts falling strait down.


*"Hinge"

 

[bill smith]

plenty of time bill? Really? im gonna throw out a number bill. I want you to tell me what it represents. are you ready?

.0012626 seconds

thats point zero zero one two six two six seconds.

What does that represent billl?

Visible I think.

 

[psikeyhackr]

Then he spend some time explaining that mass and its distribution effect the swing frequency of a building.
I know that, it affects the stability, and thereby roll frequency, of a ship too.
Look up pendulum for the teory behind it.

Could you sum up the point of the video?

.
The point of that video was to show that the mass and its distribution affected the behavior of a somewhat flexible vertical structure therefore that information should be necessary and available to analyze the WTC.

I showed here how distribution of mass altered the collapse times of 64 foot drops.

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post2501.html#p2501

So we should have the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of the WTC from an official US government source in human readable form.

psik

 

[tsig]

.
The straight down gravitational collapse. I think it is obviously IMPOSSIBLE, but this 9/11 psychosis has gripped the planet.

I'm thinking if I cut the cardboard tubes from toilet tissue rolls down to 1 inch lengths and use them as supports between the hard drives they would provide crushable supports to resist the falling mass. The hard drives would provide the inertial mass. I could even use hard drives separated by toilet roll tubes for my falling mass to collapse upon itself like the top of the north tower had to.

psik

Most people, when they attempt to model a structure, start out with the design of the real structure.

 

[dtugg]

Visible I think.

Assuming this would be visible, explain how it would be captured on a video camera, no planer.

 

[A W Smith]

Visible I think.

no bill you thought wrong as usual. Thats the time spent by the plane traveling one foot. a bit over one thousandth of a second. Time that you think is plenty of time for the plane to suddenly change direction.


Bill. enlighten us. How many frames per second is commercial broadcast video shot at?

 

[psikeyhackr]

You actually your stupid little model compares in any way to the WTC? Wow, you are almost as bad as Heiwa!

.
So why don't you go to some of our engineering schools and ask them why they use so many "stupid little models" to teach physical principles in their physics classes.

I did mine at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

http://iar-ira.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/press/news_1_8_e.html

They still do models. There were models built of the WTC back in the 60s to do the wind tunnel testing.

psik

 

[bill smith]

no bill you thought wrong as usual. Thats the time spent by the plane traveling one foot. a bit over one thousandth of a second. Time that you think is plenty of time for the plane to suddenly change direction.


Bill. enlighten us. How many frames per second is commercial broadcast video shot at?

Whatever....this is only a detail that can be argued both ways. If the plane did not rotate then he wingtip effortlessly sliced through a few steel box columns which is equally unlkely. Are you going to comment on the shimmying ? Think of a tuning-fork when you do. Not a perfect analogy but definately an applicable one.

 

[A W Smith]

Show your work PSI

.
The point of that video was to show that the mass and its distribution affected the behavior of a somewhat flexible vertical structure therefore that information should be necessary and available to analyze the WTC.

I showed here how distribution of mass altered the collapse times of 64 foot drops.

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/post2501.html#p2501

So we should have the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of the WTC from an official US government source in human readable form.

psik

then show us how you solved the scaling argument within your "model". use the formulas starting at page 31 of this pdf
http://911myths.com/images/f/f0/911physics_big.pdf

 

[tsig]

.
So why don't you go to some of our engineering schools and ask them why they use so many "stupid little models" to teach physical principles in their physics classes.

I did mine at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

http://iar-ira.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/press/news_1_8_e.html

They still do models. There were models built of the WTC back in the 60s to do the wind tunnel testing.

psik

Nobody cares where you went to school.

Lame appeal to authority and a goalpost move.