Tony Szamboti Publishes a Technical Paper about 9/11 Truth

[Scott Sommers]

Tony and others have published a paper called
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
in the journal,
International Journal of Protective Structures.
The abstract is here
http://911inacademia.files.wordpres...isunderstandings-of-wtc-collapse-analysis.pdf
but the whole paper can be found here
http://rethink911.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Szuladzinski.Johns_.Szamboti.pdf

The International Journal of Protective Structures is not a listed journal. It is published by Multi-Science Publishing. This is not a major academic publishing house, although it appears better than Bentham. It's press page states,

Multi-Science Publishing is pleased to announce that a number of its journals have been accepted for inclusion into ISI and Scopus indexing systems. The International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching has been accepted for ISI's Social Sciences Citation Index, and will have an impact factor from June 2011; the Journal of Computational Multiphase Flows, the International Journal of Flow Control, and the International Journal of Emerging Multidisciplinary Fluid Sciences have all been selected for inclusion in Scopus.

Note that International Journal of Protective Structures is not among these journals and in 2013 had only published 4 volumes.

The chief editor of International Journal of Protective Structures is Hong Hao. He has published a large number of papers in leading and relevant journals. I am less sure of the people listed as the journal's 'editorial board' and 'associate editors'. Some of them seem surprisingly difficult to find. I have not been able to locate an impact factor for the journal, which seems very strange to me. A search with Google Scholar found that the most cited article in the journal's history has been cited only 13 times and most of these citations appear to be in papers published later by the same people. Most papers listed in the Google search have never been cited. Perhaps this is not to be unexpected from a new journal.

I congratulate Tony and his team on their success. This is not a strong publication - although it is far, far better than that thermite crap these pass around as 'research'. I leave it to voices of engineering expertise here to interpret whether the findings are meaningful.

 

[LSSBB]

Tony and others have published a paper called
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
in the journal,
International Journal of Protective Structures.
The abstract is here
http://911inacademia.files.wordpres...isunderstandings-of-wtc-collapse-analysis.pdf
but the whole paper can be found here
http://rethink911.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Szuladzinski.Johns_.Szamboti.pdf

The International Journal of Protective Structures is not a listed journal. It is published by Multi-Science Publishing. This is not a major academic publishing house, although it appears better than Bentham. It's press page states,

Note that International Journal of Protective Structures is not among these journals and in 2013 had only published 4 volumes.

The chief editor of International Journal of Protective Structures is Hong Hao. He has published a large number of papers in leading and relevant journals. I am less sure of the people listed as the journal's 'editorial board' and 'associate editors'. Some of them seem surprisingly difficult to find. I have not been able to locate an impact factor for the journal, which seems very strange to me. A search with Google Scholar found that the most cited article in the journal's history has been cited only 13 times and most of these citations appear to be in papers published later by the same people. Most papers listed in the Google search have never been cited. Perhaps this is not to be unexpected from a new journal.

I congratulate Tony and his team on their success. This is not a strong publication - although it is far, far better than that thermite crap these pass around as 'research'. I leave it to voices of engineering expertise here to interpret whether the findings are meaningful.

Still processing it, however the paper kicks off with an unvalidated assumption:

The only complete hypothesis of the global collapse mechanism of the Towers is a successive flattening of stories associated with compressive column failure and referred to as a Progressive Column Failure mode or PCF in brief

Hilite added by me. Essentially, they are setting up a strawman and attacking it.

 

[DGM]

I'm also in the processing phase of this paper. (something "truthers" never really go through)

Initial feelings is it's a "school yard spat" with Bazant as the target.

The first thing we need to consider is the buildings did in fact collapse. This paper sets out to invalidate an extreme case that shows that collapse is inevitable once it starts. They look for an even more extreme condition in favor of arrest and try to make the case Bazant over estimates the available energy by creating a one story fall (they're trying to save the building on paper).

The paper attempts a mixture of theory with reality to prove something that is not reality in the first place. Keep in mind, the building did fail.

True, the top "block" did not go through a one story "free-fall" but it is also unlikely that all the columns lined up perfectly to facilitate the collapse arrest.

Bazant does not make a case against CD nor does this paper make a case for. It's really very bland.

Reading the paper you come away with the question. "And"? They never actually go there.

I'm not an engineer but, I don't really see the point of this paper (I am willing to be corrected and learn).

I'm sure I'll be talking to Tony about this soon. He does read this forum.

 

[GlennB]

True, the top "block" did not go through a one story "free-fall" but it is also unlikely that all the columns lined up perfectly to facilitate the collapse arrest.

My hilite. It's distantly possible that, freakishly, a few column ends might have met.

Tony's entire theory rested on disproving the paper theory of Bazant with the (utterly erroneous) idea that real-life column ends would meet. It was a bizarre hybrid in that sense, where Bazantian theory was applied to a real world that was, however, being viewed purely in theory.

Essentially, TS totally insisted on having the best of both worlds but could never comprehend why this was an invalid concept..

 

[DGM]

My hilite. It's distantly possible that, freakishly, a few column ends might have met.

I was being generous.

 

[ergo]

Of course, the paper referenced is not a technical paper about 9/11 truth. It's a technical paper about the inapplicability of Bazant's model to the real world. Since there already is a thread for that, and since Scott has not understood the subject of the referenced paper, this thread appears to have no reason for existence except perhaps to educate Scott Sommers about what technical papers are and are not.

 

[DGM]

Of course, the paper referenced is not a technical paper about 9/11 truth. It's a technical paper about the inapplicability of Bazant's model to the real world. Since there already is a thread for that, and since Scott has not understood the subject of the referenced paper, this thread appears to have no reason for existence except perhaps to educate Scott Sommers about what technical papers are and are not.

The first Bazant papers were not intended to represent the real world. When will you get this through your head?

They were limiting models.

 

[TexasJack]

I'm familair with Szamboti and Szuladzinki (I believie they are forum members here), but I have never heard of the third author, Richard Johns from Langara College in Canada. Google finds a philosphy instructor and nothing else. Does anyone know who he is?

 

[ergo]

The first Bazant papers were not intended to represent the real world. When will you get this through your head?

When will you understand what the phrase "real world" means?

 

[DGM]

When will you understand what the phrase "real world" means?

I already know.

Why do you keep confusing the early limiting models with reality?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I'm familair with Szamboti and Szuladzinki (I believie they are forum members here), but I have never heard of the third author, Richard Johns from Langara College in Canada. Google finds a philosphy instructor and nothing else. Does anyone know who he is?

Langara_College^WP? Now there's an institution I have never heard of before.

 

[LSSBB]

Langara_College^WP? Now there's an institution I have never heard of before.

Hey, as long as it's accredited, it can be just as valid, as, say, the University of Minnesota Duluth.

 

[DGM]

Tony Szamboti Publishes a Technical Paper about 9/11 Truth

I'm not really seeing any "truth" in this.

I'm seeing a pissing contest with Bazant and models but, "truth" concepts are absent as far as I can see. They do link to "truthy" sources but they sidestep the direct references.

 

[TheJamesrocket]

Tony and others have published a paper called
Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis
in the journal,
International Journal of Protective Structures.
The abstract is here
http://911inacademia.files.wordpres...isunderstandings-of-wtc-collapse-analysis.pdf
but the whole paper can be found here
http://rethink911.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Szuladzinski.Johns_.Szamboti.pdf

The International Journal of Protective Structures is not a listed journal. It is published by Multi-Science Publishing. This is not a major academic publishing house, although it appears better than Bentham. It's press page states,

Note that International Journal of Protective Structures is not among these journals and in 2013 had only published 4 volumes.

Geez, whats with you guys? You're so quick to throw any journal associated with the twoof movement under the bus, just like the fools who were claiming that the JEM had jumped the shark for publishing critiques of bazant. If you don't like people talking about the CD stuff, then just say it! Don't make up arbitrary reasons as an excuse. The fear of concepts implicating the powers that be has been a universal constant throughout human history. The reason there hasn't been a been a REAL investigation into the 911 attacks is not because an absence of evidence that the original commission report is false, but because of widespread moral cowardice amongst the populace. That is hardly surprising.

People worry more about how they are perceived by peers than whether they are standing up for the truth (which, by the way, how do we have anyway of knowing? I mean hey, this is the postmodernist era, after all...). Having a class of menial wage slaves who self-censor themselves is what has allowed the state to continue with their blatant power grabbing in the wake of 911. It has been said time and again, true power comes out of the barrel of a gun. The people know this, but they are too afraid to acknowledge it. Look at what happens when you tell them that taxation equals force! They act like a resentful, cornered rodent. This fear of fingering the ruling authoritys is an ancient cultural artifact, which remains even though we have something called a bill of rights.

 

[LSSBB]

Geez, whats with you guys? You're so quick to throw any journal associated with the twoof movement under the bus, just like the fools who were claiming that the JEM had jumped the shark for publishing critiques of bazant. If you don't like people talking about the CD stuff, then just say it! Don't make up arbitrary reasons as an excuse. The fear of concepts implicating the powers that be has been a universal constant throughout human history. The reason there hasn't been a been a REAL investigation into the 911 attacks is not because an absence of evidence that the original commission report is false, but because of widespread moral cowardice amongst the populace. That is hardly surprising.

People worry more about how they are perceived by peers than whether they are standing up for the truth (which, by the way, how do we have anyway of knowing? I mean hey, this is the postmodernist era, after all...). Having a class of menial wage slaves who self-censor themselves is what has allowed the state to continue with their blatant power grabbing in the wake of 911. It has been said time and again, true power comes out of the barrel of a gun. The people know this, but they are too afraid to acknowledge it. Look at what happens when you tell them that taxation equals force! They act like a resentful, cornered rodent. This fear of fingering the ruling authoritys is an ancient cultural artifact, which remains even though we have something called a bill of rights.

You do realize this paper ignores Major Tom's ROOSD, don't you?

 

[DGM]

If you don't like people talking about the CD stuff, then just say it!

This paper has nothing to do with CD. Maybe you should read something before you comment.



What is it with "truthers". Do you just assume something your heroes produce supports your belief?

 

[jhunter1163]

Even if the column ends had all met, by some freakish chance (right after the monkeys typed Shakespeare and pigs sprouted wings and flew), is there any reason to think that this would have affected the progression of the collapse in any way?

 

[The Big Dog]

Geez, whats with you guys? You're so quick to throw any journal associated with the twoof movement under the bus, just like the fools who were claiming that the JEM had jumped the shark for publishing critiques of bazant. If you don't like people talking about the CD stuff, then just say it! Don't make up arbitrary reasons as an excuse. The fear of concepts implicating the powers that be has been a universal constant throughout human history. The reason there hasn't been a been a REAL investigation into the 911 attacks is not because an absence of evidence that the original commission report is false, but because of widespread moral cowardice amongst the populace. That is hardly surprising.

People worry more about how they are perceived by peers than whether they are standing up for the truth (which, by the way, how do we have anyway of knowing? I mean hey, this is the postmodernist era, after all...). Having a class of menial wage slaves who self-censor themselves is what has allowed the state to continue with their blatant power grabbing in the wake of 911. It has been said time and again, true power comes out of the barrel of a gun. The people know this, but they are too afraid to acknowledge it. Look at what happens when you tell them that taxation equals force! They act like a resentful, cornered rodent. This fear of fingering the ruling authoritys is an ancient cultural artifact, which remains even though we have something called a bill of rights.

You took your failure to understand a simple, common and straightforward analysis of the merits and reputation of the scholarly journal and just freaking ran with it didn't you? LOLZ!

OP: Say, this journal does not enjoy a very good reputation.
You: ZOMG you are teh sheep! Viva teh revolutrions!

Hee hee!

 

[TheJamesrocket]

This paper has nothing to do with CD. Maybe you should read something before you comment.



What is it with "truthers". Do you just assume something your heroes produce supports your belief?

Oho, we've got a funny boy here. I'll be keeping an eye on you, mister!

 

[Dave Rogers]

The reason there hasn't been a been a REAL investigation into the 911 attacks[...]

Ah, outright denial of reality. From this point, nothing you have to say is worth listening to.

Dave