• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Heiwa Challenge

Status
Not open for further replies.
You will never see the challenge met.

If NIST couldn't do it with millions of dollars, the non-toofers here don't have a chance.

:D


They didn't come up with a simple solution to Fermat's Last Theorem or a Theory of Everything.

Oh wait, they weren't asked to do any of those either. :D
 
The Heiwa Challenge


It is assumed at JREF 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Forum that a structure will be crushed, if you drop a piece (1/10th) of the same structure on it and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy. So here is the challenge: Prove it!

Conditions:

1. The structure is supposed to have a certain cross area A and height h and is fixed on the ground. The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size!
2. The structure should be more or less identical from h = 0 to h = h, e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements may be reinforced or made a little stronger, if required. Connections between elements should be similar throughout.
3. It is recognized that the structure may be a little higher stressed at h=0 than h=h due to uniform density, elements, etc.
4. Before drop test the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections between elements cannot rely solely on friction.
5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure.
6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C.
7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A.
8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test).
9. In order to easily repeat the test/challenge drop height should be <1.1 h, i.e. C can only be dropped from 2h above ground on A that is 0.9 h high.
10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other after test, i.e. drop by part C on A.

Have a try! I look forward to your structures!

Heiwa

Heiwa, out of curiosity, have you tried this experiment yourself?
 
Heiwa, out of curiosity, have you tried this experiment yourself?

Yes, of course. Several times with various structures. Result is always as expected. Part C cannot crush part A. C (pizza boxes, lemons, sponges, &c) sometimes bounces on A, i.e. C cannot even apply sufficient energy to cause failures, or C (eggs, glasses, &c) is destroyed in pieces, while A is not one-way crushed down.

Pls note that conditions have been modified a little. Drop height should be 3.7 m regardless of h to ensure impact velocity 8.52 m/s. So you need a ladder or similar to drop C on A.
 
Last edited:
Sorry Heiwa, i should have been more specific.

Can you please give me a detailed example of a structure that you built, that adheres to the conditions that you've provided?

I'm trying to get an idea of,

- the size of the structure
- the materials, and construction
- any photos or videos? (this isn't necessary, i'm only asking)




Off topic - much props to you for making a submission to the ASCE. I'll be interested to hear the feedback you get.
 
Pls note that conditions have been modified a little. Drop height should be 3.7 m regardless of h to ensure impact velocity 8.52 m/s. So you need a ladder or similar to drop C on A.


Heiwa, surely this drop height put some limits to the scale you could work with? Can i get an idea of what you consider reasonable build sizes to be (that would be fair to your experiment)?
 
Heiwa, surely this drop height put some limits to the scale you could work with? Can i get an idea of what you consider reasonable build sizes to be (that would be fair to your experiment)?

Any scale, any size, any structure are sufficient, as long as C<1/10A, C and A have same internal structure (material, elements, joints, &c) and C is dropped on A (say from 3.7 m) and tries to one-way crush down A.

I have in kitchen and backyard tried with various composite structures; steel, pizza boxes, lemons, sponges, bricks, wood logs, glass, eggs and combinations of all them and reported at JREF. Result is always part A remains uncrushed.

My business associates have by bad luck dropped big Cs on really bigger As. Same result. C never crushes A. A always crushes C.
 
Off topic - much props to you for making a submission to the ASCE. I'll be interested to hear the feedback you get.

Submission was made 3 Feb 2009. Feedback 8 April was submission still under peer review. I also look forward to further feedback. Editor Ross Corotis has advised he will publish.
 
How do you know that the results do not differ if you use a real structure (skyscraper) instead of lemons?

I always use real structures in my experiments and models. What else can you use? NWO structures?

BTW Who is this LH 1919-1953? RIP.
 
I always use real structures in my experiments and models. What else can you use? NWO structures?

BTW Who is this LH 1919-1953? RIP.

Well I think there is a difference between a tower of lemons and a skyscraper.

How do you know that your result in the test will be the same for a 400m skyscraper?
 
Heiwa, I know that one example that satisfies your challenge was brought to your attention once before, but in that case you dismissed it because it was a reinforced concrete building, whereas you were claiming in that thread that steel buildings were impervious to progressive vertical collapse. However, this challenge isn't arbitrarily restricted, so it's a fair example. The example was Skyline Towers, Baileys Crossroads, VA., in 1973 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_Towers_collapse). The temporary wooden shoring was pulled from under the 23rd floor before it was fully cured. At the time, the 24th floor was being poured, and I don't know how far that had progressed, but go ahead and assume that it had been poured, so two floors fell onto the 22nd floor. That floor would have been poured two weeks earlier, so it was close to fully cured, and the 21st floor was three weeks earlier so it was fully cured. Nonetheless, the two falling floors took out everything below, down into the sub-basement (so it was really more than 22 floors destroyed), by destroying them one at a time. If you look at the picture, you will see that part of the building remained standing. But that doesn't save your indestructibility hypothesis because the collapse included everything up to an expansion joint. In a reinforced concrete building, expansion joints effectively create separate buildings so that thermal stresses don't crack the concrete, and the floor slabs on each side of the expansion joint would have been poured separately (probably on successive days in this case), so the collapse was everything in that independent section of the building. In fact, the collapse also triggered a progressive horizontal collapse in an attached parking garage, which was also destroyed.

So, what was the prize for meeting you challenge? I accept PayPal.
 
Heiwa, I know that one example that satisfies your challenge was brought to your attention once before, but in that case you dismissed it because it was a reinforced concrete building, whereas you were claiming in that thread that steel buildings were impervious to progressive vertical collapse. However, this challenge isn't arbitrarily restricted, so it's a fair example. The example was Skyline Towers, Baileys Crossroads, VA., in 1973 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_Towers_collapse). The temporary wooden shoring was pulled from under the 23rd floor before it was fully cured. At the time, the 24th floor was being poured, and I don't know how far that had progressed, but go ahead and assume that it had been poured, so two floors fell onto the 22nd floor. That floor would have been poured two weeks earlier, so it was close to fully cured, and the 21st floor was three weeks earlier so it was fully cured. Nonetheless, the two falling floors took out everything below, down into the sub-basement (so it was really more than 22 floors destroyed), by destroying them one at a time. If you look at the picture, you will see that part of the building remained standing. But that doesn't save your indestructibility hypothesis because the collapse included everything up to an expansion joint. In a reinforced concrete building, expansion joints effectively create separate buildings so that thermal stresses don't crack the concrete, and the floor slabs on each side of the expansion joint would have been poured separately (probably on successive days in this case), so the collapse was everything in that independent section of the building. In fact, the collapse also triggered a progressive horizontal collapse in an attached parking garage, which was also destroyed.

So, what was the prize for meeting you challenge? I accept PayPal.

Fairfax County hired Professor Ingvar Schoushoe of the University of Illinois, a concrete specialist, to investigate the cause of the collapse. He determined that the collapse occurred because of the premature removal of shoring from beneath newly poured floors.

It seems no structural part C was dropped on a similar structural part A (C<1/10A). Where's the picture? And part A standing? It must be one-way crushed down by part C. Attached parking garage horizontally collapsed? Not necessary.

Anyway - take a reinforced concrete structure with whatever expansion joints you like, take part C of it and drop it on remainder part A. If part C one-way crushes A, pls provide full details and advise your Paypal account. The money will be on its way.
 
It seems no structural part C was dropped on a similar structural part A (C<1/10A). Where's the picture? And part A standing? It must be one-way crushed down by part C. Attached parking garage horizontally collapsed? Not necessary.

Anyway - take a reinforced concrete structure with whatever expansion joints you like, take part C of it and drop it on remainder part A. If part C one-way crushes A, pls provide full details and advise your Paypal account. The money will be on its way.

Sorry, I thought the Wiki had a picture. Here one:
http://www.physorg.com/news93273014.html

You can find a lot of links about the collapse, but it seems to be mostly redundant. (Google both "Skyline Plaza" which was the name of the whole complex and "Skyline Towers" which was the name of these particular condominium buildings in the Plaza.)

Part C was the 23rd and 24th floors. Part A was the sub-basement up to the 22nd floor. Does that not meet your challenge?
 
Not when you drop a part C of it on remainder part A.

Please, tell us what the similarities are between these:

lemons.jpg


and these:

twintowers1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity: is there an example of 10% of anything crushing the other 90% of what's remaining?

I don't mean to redirect this back to the original challenge, but I'm just checking in to see if we've made any progress with this.

Can you enlighten me as to why people like yourself assign percentages assuming loads are directly proportional to those percentages when the conditions the masses are being exposed to are dynamic as opposed to static? Does dynamic weight exist in your version of physics? Is the weight of the object at rest the same as when it accelerates and then slams into another object? Just checking to see if we've made any progress here.
 
Last edited:
Heiwa

I noticed earlier in the thread that you were offering money to someone who successfully completes your "challenge".

Did you ever get around to proving that you had the money in question? I mean even the JREF challenge proves that they have the money in question.
 
Heiwa

I noticed earlier in the thread that you were offering money to someone who successfully completes your "challenge".

Did you ever get around to proving that you had the money in question? I mean even the JREF challenge proves that they have the money in question.

Conditions are at posts #1 and #239. In this Challenge only honour is at stake. A money award is mentioned in another thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom