Why a one-way Crush down is not possible

[twinstead]

The 'foot of God' theory is laughable. Good luck with that.

So are arguments from ignorant personal incredulity. Good luck with those

 

[aggle-rithm]

I haven't checked this thread in a while, I see Heiwa still doesn't know what he's talking about.

I think he does know what he's talking about. He's perfectly aware that he's spouting nonsense. He's feigning ignorance because he's either seriously deluded or a troll.

I also see too many people sucked into engaging him. Wouldn't it make perfect sense to simply ignore him and not play into his attention seeking delusions?

Way ahead of you!

 

[aggle-rithm]

Heiwa is absolutely correct. The top part cannot gain mass. Period.

Let's define what we mean by "top part".

We mean "the part that is moving". It really isn't a single part, but the sum total of all the moving rubble.

Do you deny that there is more mass moving near the end of the collapse than at the beginning?

Most of the building is clearly not intact. If it's not moving, then where is it?

 

[six7s]

Most of the building is clearly not intact. If it's not moving, then where is it?

Its on YouTube

 

[FineWine]

Heiwa is absolutely correct. The top part cannot gain mass. Period.

Faith-based science is getting ridiculous.

How would you know if he was correct or not? You cling desperately and irrationally to absurd beliefs that have been disproved a thousand times. Talk about "faith-based"!

 

[Heiwa]

How would you know if he was correct or not? You cling desperately and irrationally to absurd beliefs that have been disproved a thousand times. Talk about "faith-based"!

Topic is Why a one-way Crush down is not possible, and nobody seems to be able to disprove it. Religious fundamentalists of various sects however seem to believe that one-way Crush downs are normal and frequent. Asking for any evidence to support their beliefs have failed, I am happy to conclude.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Topic is Why a one-way Crush down is not possible, and nobody seems to be able to disprove it.

It's impossible to disprove something that is so fundamentally flawed in the first place...

 

[twinstead]

Topic is Why a one-way Crush down is not possible, and nobody seems to be able to disprove it. Religious fundamentalists of various sects however seem to believe that one-way Crush downs are normal and frequent. Asking for any evidence to support their beliefs have failed, I am happy to conclude.

Keep up, Heiwa. No disrespect intended, but like any fundamentalist you are totally unaware that it has been shown to just about anybody with half a brain that you don't know what you are talking about.

I see it. Lurkers see it. Everybody sees it. The only ones who don't are YOU, and a couple other cult members who also have no idea that you actually don't have any idea what you're talking about.

This is simple; in order to hold on to your beliefs you are accusing those who hold the majority opinion of being like Religious fundamentalists when it is quite apparent that it is YOU, a member of a tiny cult in the tiny minority of opinion, who are the fundamentalist.

I don't expect you to get it.

 

[FineWine]

Topic is Why a one-way Crush down is not possible, and nobody seems to be able to disprove it. Religious fundamentalists of various sects however seem to believe that one-way Crush downs are normal and frequent. Asking for any evidence to support their beliefs have failed, I am happy to conclude.

Why don't you stop the childish name-calling. Not one of the engineers who correct your errors is a religious fundamentalist. They understand physics, and you don't. Your absurd beliefs have been disproved repeatedly. Whose fault is it that you can't learn from people who understand the subject better than you do?

 

[WildCat]

Topic is Why a one-way Crush down is not possible, and nobody seems to be able to disprove it.

The answer is in this riddle:

When is a ship not a ship?

When it's a skyscraper!

I totally stole that from Captian Obvious!

 

[Heiwa]

Why don't you stop the childish name-calling. Not one of the engineers who correct your errors is a religious fundamentalist. They understand physics, and you don't. Your absurd beliefs have been disproved repeatedly. Whose fault is it that you can't learn from people who understand the subject better than you do?

So you also believe (!) that a one-way Crush down is possible? Prove it, then! See The Heiwa Challenge thread for details.

 

[Typicallucas]

Heiwa doesn't read anything we write... I could write anything and he would never know it. Neener-neener-neener.

We should just talk amonst ourselves.

Did anybody notice this?

I am happy to conclude.

If this was a typo, it's a juicily ironic one. I think it means he's happier coming to conclusions than actually doing any thinking.

We should start a satirical fundamentalist sect, it should be called Heiwatics. We will say tons of crazy things, ignore any rational opposition completely, announce that nobody has disproven any crazy thing we've said, and repeat ourselves constantly. We'll worship the God of Feigned Ignorance and his only begotten son Personal Incredulity. We will all argue about topics that have little or nothing to do with our area of study. We will reduce all confusing detail of a complicated interaction to very simple, intuitive, generalities. We will spend our free time making websites filled with absolute gibberish and point to them as evidence for our wonky claims!

It's impossible to disprove something that is so fundamentally flawed in the first place...

I agree. The only thing I can think to do is point out the fundamental flaws.

Heiwa, how can a sabot round weighing less than 11 pounds destroy a tank weighing over 40 tons?

Ooh ooh, can I answer? Is it because the sabot round has enough kinetic energy to blast a tank apart even though the tank thousands of times more massive?

Just replace gravity by an engine/propeller you'll understand...

One that accelerates at 32 feet/sec/sec?

Do they make those now?

I wonder what it would take to get a 137,000 metric ton cargo ship to accelerate that fast. How many Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne RS-68A engines would you have to use? They generate 3.11 MN of thrust... anybody good with a calculator? Figure a 15 meter draft, though after a couple of seconds the whole ship should be planing over the water.

[replying to Heiwa]And you really can't be an engineer! Write less and read more.

Nice one! I couldn't have said it better myself.

...You don't need ANY acceleration to get to the moon. All you need is a little velocity.
...
Your ship:building :: propeller:gravity analogy is garbage.
...
Evasive and willfully incompetent, Heiwa. These are not admirable qualities.

Three nice points, good work!

The 'foot of God' theory is laughable. Good luck with that.

First we had "one-way crush down" and now "'foot of God' theory." Are these guys just making things up?

You know, I have seen footage of at least a dozen building demolitions, and one in person. They were all very very loud. Lots and lots of loud explosions. Heiwa and his fellow conspiracy buddies seem to think that demolition charges can go off quietly when in fact they would have been heard for the better part of a mile around. Footage of the collapse (which records sounds better than the human mind in panic) didn't record any of these sounds.

On yet another note, if I ever get this fanatical about an imaginary conspiracy theory I would hope someone would talk me down. I imagine it must be agonizingly painful to be so deluded. To be so convinced that the government would conspire to kill thousands of it's own in an act of false flag terrorism must kill any hope for humanity.

 

[BasqueArch]

Evidently C will always retain its mass but, in contact with A, at any velocity, A will start to shred this mass C into small pieces and decelarate and stop/arrest them. This happens at any collision small C against big A.

And it is evidently not unimportant. It is the simpe reason why C cannot progressively destroy big A.

Please, do not believe that little C becomes more massive while gaining velocity! This is just preached by religious fundamentalists and their associated engineers and physicians and politicians supporting OTC.

Do you suggest that Titanic and its engine (providing the force! - like gravity and properly aligned), part C, would just slice through the ice berg A?

"Not only it's not right, it's not even wrong." - Wolfgang Pauli

 

[alienentity]

Hey do any of you follow the strange antics of Dr. Judy Wood? I noticed there's nothing on recent threads about her linkage of the WTC collapses and the 'Hutchison effect'.

Personally I think she's a lot more creative than Heiwa, who seems to drone on about the same thing on thread after thread.

I don't see why Dr. Wood is being neglected so.....combining her usual dustification stuff with Hutchison is just so interesting and nutty.

Sorry for the OT. Maybe I'll start a thread to drain attention away from Heiwa....hehe.

 

[Heiwa]

Heiwa doesn't read anything we write... I could write anything and he would never know it.

...

Heiwa and his fellow conspiracy buddies seem to think that demolition charges can go off quietly when in fact they would have been heard for the better part of a mile around. Footage of the collapse (which records sounds better than the human mind in panic) didn't record any of these sounds.

On yet another note, if I ever get this fanatical about an imaginary conspiracy theory I would hope someone would talk me down. I imagine it must be agonizingly painful to be so deluded. To be so convinced that the government would conspire to kill thousands of it's own in an act of false flag terrorism must kill any hope for humanity.

You are Off Topic! Topic is why a one-way Crush down is not possible, i.e. part C of a composite or isotropic structure A, where C<1/10A, cannot one-way crush down A from top down by gravity. Reason is that part A always destroys or arrests part C unless C just bounces off part A. A bounce is the simplest arrest.

To destroy part A you have to use other methods, e.g. some sort of controlled demolition. It is not a conspiracy theory, it is an established fact.

But if you can prove the opposite, that part C really can one-way crush down part A, you are welcome to do it. It has nothing to do with whether a government would conspire to kill thousands in an act of false flag terrorism, etc. On the contrary, it would be a nice contribution to structural safety; nobody likes a structure that self-destructs if a little part of it is dropped on and destroys it.

 

[stateofgrace]

You are Off Topic! Topic is why a one-way Crush down is not possible, i.e. part C of a composite or isotropic structure A, where C<1/10A, cannot one-way crush down A from top down by gravity. Reason is that part A always destroys or arrests part C unless C just bounces off part A. A bounce is the simplest arrest.

To destroy part A you have to use other methods, e.g. some sort of controlled demolition. It is not a conspiracy theory, it is an established fact.

But if you can prove the opposite, that part C really can one-way crush down part A, you are welcome to do it. It has nothing to do with whether a government would conspire to kill thousands in an act of false flag terrorism, etc. On the contrary, it would be a nice contribution to structural safety; nobody likes a structure that self-destructs if a little part of it is dropped on and destroys it.

On Sept 11th did 1/10 of the building appear to crush the other 9/10ths? YES or NO?

Just answer the question, please.

 

[alienentity]

This thread is off topic anyway as the forum is 9/11 conspiracy theories. The engineering question should be discussed on an engineering forum, not a conspiracy forum.

There's no conspiracy to discuss here. Just half-baked idiot engineering.

What is it about 9/11 truthers that makes them feel the need to park themselves on internet forums and hold court? Fascinating psychology. Cultists looking for a new cult to start/join?

Gravitational collapse of the WTC buildings was not due to a conspiracy, and there's no evidence to the contrary. There never was and never will be. Any good engineer should be able to tell you these things.

Time to move on.

 

[six7s]

So you also believe (!) that a one-way Crush down is possible? Prove it, then! See The Heiwa Challenge thread for details.

Or just bang your head against a brick wall for two minutes

 

[six7s]

On yet another note, if I ever get this fanatical about an imaginary conspiracy theory I would hope someone would talk me down. I imagine it must be agonizingly painful to be so deluded. To be so convinced that the government would conspire to kill thousands of it's own in an act of false flag terrorism must kill any hope for humanity.

How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?

 

[twinstead]

I also am amused by people like Heiwa coming on a relatively obscure internet forum and declaring "A one-way Crush down is not possible", being told he's wrong by numerous people who know what they are talking about, and then declaring victory.

I agree this is a subject for an engineering forum, not a conspiracy forum. If Heiwa insists on having his buttocks handed to him by real engineers that's his business, but he's harshing my buzz.