The Heiwa Challenge

[Gamolon]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4996986#post4996986

So how do you go from this:

a wall of 14"x14" (comprised of 3/8" thick steel plate) perimeter box-columns spaced at 3'-4" on center and lying braced against 4" thick reinforced concrete floors at every 12 feet. While these may have been only 14'' wide they were also 14'' DEEP and lying braced against the reinforced concrete floors at 12 foot intervals. Ansolutely EXCELLENT shock absorbers as you can imagine. In crushing they should have stopped the plane dead on the outside og the building. Maybe the engines and landing gear would have penetrated but that is it.

Then the plane- 150 spread-out tons of of aluminium sheet as thin as 1mm in the fuselage and possiby 4mm in the wings. Spread out over a width of 125 feet and a length of 155feet. The only hard points were the two six-ton engines, the aluminium wing spars and the llanding gear. The fuselage had a diameter of 13 feet or one foot larger than the space between the floors.

To sending this to structural engineers:

Dear Engineer/Architect.

2. I say that 4mm aluminium will not penetrate a 14'' x 14'' x 3/8'' well-braced steel box column. Agree/disagree.

...any additions Dave ?

Like I said, in order to try and prove your argument, you have to minimize everything in order to get people to agree with you.

Very sad.

 

[bill smith]

So how do you go from this:


To sending this to structural engineers:


Like I said, in order to try and prove your argument, you have to minimize everything in order to get people to agree with you.

Very sad.

I go into more detail on the link Igave you. Here it is again.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4997111#post4997111

 

[nicepants]

Hmmmm...

I designed the following "structure" and somebody said it didn't fit the challenge.

I wonder why.



How about this model.

Let's take a 25lb weight used for weight lifting. The round weights with a hole in the middle that can be slipped onto a weight lifting bar. Lets get 6, 1" diameter wooden dowels and pound them into the ground around the perimeter of the weight mentioned above. Let's take a single 1" diameter wooden dowel and pound it into the ground in the center of the ring we just created.

Now let's slip one of the 25lb weights mentioned onto the center wooden dowel down to about an inch from the ground. We'll put one thumbtack (the kind with the plastic head on them, not the flat heads) in each of the perimeter wooden dowels right below the weight and put two thumbtacks, opposite one another on the center wooden dowel.

We'll build our tower up 40 feet high with a "floor" weight every foot.

We'll then created a separate section the same way, but only 1/10th the size, which would be 4 weights (or 100lbs). We will then position the 1/10th section above the 40 foot tower we created using a dowel to center it above.

We then drop the 1/10th section down the centering dowel from a height of 10 feet above.

Presto!

I beat the challenge!

Sounds good, but my guess is that it will be rejected because it's not 97 + 13 "floors" (or some other equally absurd reason that Heiwa will use to reject any model that doesn't behave how he claims it should)

 

[Heiwa]

Hmmmm...

I designed the following "structure" and somebody said it didn't fit the challenge.

I wonder why.



How about this model.

Let's take a 25lb weight used for weight lifting. The round weights with a hole in the middle that can be slipped onto a weight lifting bar. Lets get 6, 1" diameter wooden dowels and pound them into the ground around the perimeter of the weight mentioned above. Let's take a single 1" diameter wooden dowel and pound it into the ground in the center of the ring we just created.

Now let's slip one of the 25lb weights mentioned onto the center wooden dowel down to about an inch from the ground. We'll put one thumbtack (the kind with the plastic head on them, not the flat heads) in each of the perimeter wooden dowels right below the weight and put two thumbtacks, opposite one another on the center wooden dowel.

We'll build our tower up 40 feet high with a "floor" weight every foot.

We'll then created a separate section the same way, but only 1/10th the size, which would be 4 weights (or 100lbs). We will then position the 1/10th section above the 40 foot tower we created using a dowel to center it above.

We then drop the 1/10th section down the centering dowel from a height of 10 feet above.

Presto!

I beat the challenge!

It looks promising on paper! So you have 4 off 25lb weights on a lifting bar that makes 100lb (4 x25=100). And what is the weight of the bar? 10 lb. OK, that's heavy! I can just lift that with two arms. Just!

What shall I do with these 110lb? Aha, position it 10 feet above a 40 feet tower of similar weights on a lifting bar - total 1100 lb! OK, OK, with a ladder I will manage. And then?

Drop it ... down the centering dowel??? 10 feel below! You are joking! Drop a small bar with weights on a another bar with more weights. Two bars shall contact each other?? Like hitting a heavy nail (10 units) with another nail (1 unit).

And then? Presto????

Sorry - nothing will break here! All weights will be undamaged and so will the lifting bars/nails, if you manage to hit one with the other. Not even the wooden dowels are damaged!

You failed! Try again!

PS. 50 kgs dropped from 3.3 m will just produce rougly 16 000 J. Cannot do much harm to 500 kgs of solid weights/bars/wooden dowels.

 

[Newtons Bit]

And the oblivious Heiwa once again fails to see that the connections are critical.

Your model satisifies his ridiculous challenge just fine Gamolon.

 

[Gamolon]

Hmmmmm... Let's see. Here is a quote of Heiwa's conditions:

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

So let's see if my "structure" meets all the requirements set forth by Heiwa himself in his original post.

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!

Yup. My structure has a certain cross area and height and is fixed in the ground. My structure is an assembly of various elements of ANY type. It is 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.

Yup. Matches that condition.

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.

Yup. Matches that.

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.

Yup. Matches that.

5. Before test 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at h = 0.9 h without damaging the structure.

No problem there.

6. The lower structure, 0.9 h high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 h high, is called part C.

Ok. I speak out loud and say "Part C is in my hands and part A is the rest that is still standing". Got it.

7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A

Yup. No problem.

8. Now drop part C on part A and crush part A (if you can! That's the test).

No problem. Part C obliterates part A and everything comes apart in pieces.

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

Ok. Done. The structure was obliterated.

Now what? Which condition of the ten conditions that Heiwa set forth did I not meet?

 

[Gamolon]

I go into more detail on the link Igave you. Here it is again.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4997111#post4997111

So why did you post this then?

Dear Engineer/Architect.

1.I say that no structure on Earth can be crushed down flat on the ground by the top 10% of itself by gravity alone. Agree/disagree

2. I say that 4mm aluminium will not penetrate a 14'' x 14'' x 3/8'' well-braced steel box column. Agree/disagree.

...any additions Dave ?

 

[Gamolon]

Sounds good, but my guess is that it will be rejected because it's not 97 + 13 "floors" (or some other equally absurd reason that Heiwa will use to reject any model that doesn't behave how he claims it should)

Well that can't happen. Heiwa needs to point out which of the 10 conditions set forth by him in the original post that my structure does not meet and why.

In condition 1 he clearly states "The structure is an assembly of various elements of any type. It can be any size!" I need to know how my structure does not meet the ANY size or comprised of elements of ANY type.

 

[nicepants]

It looks promising on paper! So you have 4 off 25lb weights on a lifting bar that makes 100lb (4 x25=100).

What shall I do with these 110lb? Aha, position it 10 feet above a 40 feet tower of similar weights on a lifting bar

<snip>

You failed! Try again!

Gamolon's model did not include any lifting bars. The failure you've declared, therefore, does not apply to his model, but to a strawman you've created.

 

[FineWine]

This is The Heiwa Challenge thread! See post #1! No lies. You are supposed to design a structure, e.g. with 110 floors, and then drop a part of it, say 13 floors (part C), on the remainder 97 floors (part A)! Clear.

You are not supposed to drop 13 floors on 1 floor! You are supposed to drop 13 floors (C) on all 97 floors (A).


And the 13 floors (part C) have not collapsed prior drop/impact. They are supposed to one-way crush down 97 floors (A) below. That's the Challenge!

You are not supposed to locate yourself between C and A at contact, where the action starts, e.g. that A damages C at impact. Pls, read post #1 about safety! You are supposed to stay on ground and report the result!

You see, A is fixed to ground. Quite solid, actually. You don't believe that little C, dropping from the sky a few metres, can destroy A? What about the ground?

The good news are that so far in The Heiwa Challenge all parts C produced have been destroyed by part A and ground in all attempts.

Pls produce a structure that self-destructs. Not words in cyber space!

Stop the nonsense! The "Heiwa Challenge" has nothing to do with the events of 9/11. It doesn't belong in this forum.

Answer my questions or go away. You've played this tired tune far too long. Everyone is sick of hearing it.

Look at the part of your post I bolded. Thirteen floors DID drop on one floor. How the hell do thirteen floors hit ninety-seven floors all at once??? Do you have any idea of what you're saying?

 

[Gamolon]

It looks promising on paper! So you have 4 off 25lb weights on a lifting bar that makes 100lb (4 x25=100). And what is the weight of the bar? 10 lb. OK, that's heavy! I can just lift that with two arms. Just!

What shall I do with these 110lb? Aha, position it 10 feet above a 40 feet tower of similar weights on a lifting bar - total 1100 lb! OK, OK, with a ladder I will manage. And then?

Drop it ... down the centering dowel??? 10 feel below! You are joking! Drop a small bar with weights on a another bar with more weights. Two bars shall contact each other?? Like hitting a heavy nail (10 units) with another nail (1 unit).

And then? Presto????

Sorry - nothing will break here! All weights will be undamaged and so will the lifting bars/nails, if you manage to hit one with the other. Not even the wooden dowels are damaged!

You failed! Try again!

PS. 50 kgs dropped from 3.3 m will just produce rougly 16 000 J. Cannot do much harm to 500 kgs of solid weights/bars/wooden dowels.

Sorry, but your 10 conditions say nothing about this. The correct condition set forth by you for success is the following:

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.

You say nothing about "damage" to the floors. You simply say that >70% of the individual elements are disconnected from each other. The floor "weights" become disconnected from each other, the thumbtack supports are all broken from the "weight" floors (that means 8 tacks per "weight" floor times 40 floors which equals 320 actual support elements that become disconnected from the floors). This looks like WAY more than 70% of the elements becoming disconnected from each other.

So far, I have met your challenge according to the conditions you set forth.

Show me exactly which of the 10 conditions my structure does not meet.

 

[Gamolon]

Gamolon's model did not include any lifting bars. The failure you've declared, therefore, does not apply to his model, but to a strawman you've created.

Thanks nicepants. Heiwa needs to read and comprehend a little better.

 

[Gamolon]

It looks promising on paper! So you have 4 off 25lb weights on a lifting bar that makes 100lb (4 x25=100). And what is the weight of the bar? 10 lb. OK, that's heavy! I can just lift that with two arms. Just!

What shall I do with these 110lb? Aha, position it 10 feet above a 40 feet tower of similar weights on a lifting bar - total 1100 lb! OK, OK, with a ladder I will manage. And then?

Drop it ... down the centering dowel??? 10 feel below! You are joking! Drop a small bar with weights on a another bar with more weights. Two bars shall contact each other?? Like hitting a heavy nail (10 units) with another nail (1 unit).

And then? Presto????

Sorry - nothing will break here! All weights will be undamaged and so will the lifting bars/nails, if you manage to hit one with the other. Not even the wooden dowels are damaged!

You failed! Try again!

PS. 50 kgs dropped from 3.3 m will just produce rougly 16 000 J. Cannot do much harm to 500 kgs of solid weights/bars/wooden dowels.

First of all, as has been told you, there is no "lifting bar" in the center. It's a wooden dowel.

Second, when the upper part is dropped on the lower part the "thumbtack" supports will break or bend down releasing the weights down the center dowel breaking all the lower weight floors from their "thumbtack" supports as they all crash down.

Like I said, according to your 10 conditions, you need to tell me which condition my structure specificllay does NOT meet or I have beaten your challenge.

Good Luck!!!!

 

[Gamolon]

This is The Heiwa Challenge thread! See post #1! No lies. You are supposed to design a structure, e.g. with 110 floors, and then drop a part of it, say 13 floors (part C), on the remainder 97 floors (part A)! Clear.

Wrong!

Per condition 1 of your original post, there is no mention of how many floors ANYWHERE. Here is your condition:

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!

Here's another condition you try and change:

And the 13 floors (part C) have not collapsed prior drop/impact. They are supposed to one-way crush down 97 floors (A) below. That's the Challenge!

Wrong again! You can't even remember your own condition you set for winning the challenge. Here is your condition, written by you, for winning:

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.

>70% of the elements in part A are disconnected. Easy.

 

[SteveAustin]

<insulting rant snipped>

My additions:

You have humiliated yourself by fleeing from the obvious refutation of Heiwa's idiocy, but your goose has been cooked. The falling floors will always be the BIG PART. The single floors they crush in succession will always be the SMALL PART. All your ridiculous lies, all your squirming and tap dancing, all your craven avoidance of this FACT has only served to highlight the untenability of your mad position.

So what you are saying is that the upper section is not made up of individual floors just like the bottom section? That when the top section falls it suddenly becomes one indestructible block and instead of having it's own floors destroyed upwards one at a time as it falls and destroys the bottom section one floor at a time, it remains intact until it hits the ground and then it loses it's indestructibility and get destroyed?

You see, it's the part where what happens to the bottom section happens to the top section equally and at the same time that is missing from your theory, and if you say that there is a layer of rubble that protects the upper section from damage from each and every impact onto every floor, well that rubble would have the exact same protection on the lower floors as it would on the upper floors.

No, the theory JREF "debunkers" are pushing is one that does not follow the laws of physics.

Every impact of the top section onto the lower section (in the Official Theory) would cause equal damage to the top section as it would to the bottom section one floor at a time. So if the top section falls and destroys one floor because it affects the lower section one floor at a time and not the entire lower section then the top section gets destroyed one floor at a time as well at the same rate as the lower section does, which means that according to the Official Conspiracy Theory there should be about 80 floors 50 floors still standing

<snipped further insulting rant>

 

[SteveAustin]

You have been caught lying again. The collapsing floors, as you know, are the BIG PART; the single floors they crush in succession are the SMALL PART.

You are trapped--hopelessly refuted. You think that by repeating the same discredited nonsense over and over, you can salvage your absurd fantasy. Watch me make you run away again:

You keep repeating this ridiculous fantasy.

You keep saying that 2 identical blocks of differing sizes are to be treated differently. One is fragile and must be treated one floor at a time but the other is indestructible and is to be treated as ONE block.

This is fraudulent, and any engineer or other professional who peddles this nonsense should lose their license to practice, heck should lose their diplomas.

Maybe you need a refresher, here is a webpage you might be able to understand...

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/newtlaws/u2l4a.cfm

 

[twinstead]

Every impact of the top section onto the lower section (in the Official Theory) would cause equal damage to the top section as it would to the bottom section one floor at a time. So if the top section falls and destroys one floor because it affects the lower section one floor at a time and not the entire lower section then the top section gets destroyed one floor at a time as well at the same rate as the lower section does, which means that according to the Official Conspiracy Theory there should be about 80 floors 50 floors still standing

Pardon me if I ask for a second opinion on this, after all, you're just some dude on an internet forum, right? So, what do I do if I take this to some of my engineer friends and they say you don't know what you're talking about? Do I accuse them of being government shills? How many experts need to tell me that you don't know what you're talking about before I should believe them? 1? 10? 100? 1000? Give me a number.


You do realize it's not just JREF who disagree with you, right?

 

[SteveAustin]

Pardon me if I ask for a second opinion on this, after all, you're just some dude on an internet forum, right? So, what do I do if I take this to some of my engineer friends and they say you don't know what you're talking about? Do I accuse them of being government shills? How many experts need to tell me that you don't know what you're talking about before I should believe them? 1? 10? 100? 1000? Give me a number.


You do realize it's not just JREF who disagree with you, right?

Did you have a rebuttal in there somewhere? A counter argument of some sort? Or were you just going to go with the Smoke And Mirrors?

 

[dtugg]

Hey Agent Steve! Keep up the great work!

 

[SteveAustin]

Hey Agent Steve! Keep up the great work!

excellent counter argument there dtugg, I see you are up to your usual standards!!