Heiwa:
If the fall of the Twin Towers was NOT a gravity-driven collapse could you please explain how the explosives/incendiaries/laser beams/nukes/etc worked.
And remember, the towers were hit by aircraft travelling at ~ 500 mph and burned for ~ 1 hour or more; these little details need to be factored into your theory.....
Thanks
Apollo20/Frank
Remind you that topic is: "How could WTC1, 2 collapse due to gravity forces alone after some local failures up top?" See message #1.
The initial hole in WTC1 north wall and local failures associated with it didn't cause any collapse due to gravity forces.
Then there were random fires in various locations and various floors #94-98 and maybe higher up. Some persons are seen waving from the initial hole in the WTC1 north wall. Random fires can only cause random local failures to the steel structure and it is unlikely that random local failures suddenly initiate a global collapse. The primary load bearing columns are low stressed - <30% yield by gravity forces. If a primary load bearing column fails, evidently the gravity force carried by that column must find another way through the structure above - the
upper block - to reach the structure below.
Thus the
upper block structure will be the first to be affected by a local failure below. Its geometry will change, other structural parts may fail, local deformations may take place, parts may displace downwards, small releases of energy occur but consumed by the deformations, some parts coming loose may drop down, etc. There is plenty of redundancy. Normally further failures are soon arrested, when new equilibriums of forces is reached. Has nothing to do with energy. All depends on how the structure is assembled. It is very easy to prove this! All steel structure towers have the same stresses in their primary structure due to gravity forces. If a steel structure tower is going to be demolished in US, just start a big fire up top causing local failures and see what happens. There will be no global collapse. Just local failures in the structure
above the fire! Nothing will happen to the structure
below the fire. Happens every time. Controlled demolition of towers are not done by starting a fire up top.
As I have already pointed out, you promote seven conspiracy theories re WTC 1: A conspiracy theory is in this case just a false assumption according some secret plan in order to cover up something wrong in a scientific (sic) paper. The false assumptions are (and there are others):
1. All 230+ remaining support columns suddenly disappear below the
upper block.
2. The
upper block free falls 3.7 meters as a rigid body.
3. The
upper block impacts the structure below with perfect alignment.
4. The
upper block is still intact.
5. The
upper block (mostly air and 10-15 thin floors) assisted by gravity only destroys the 280+ columns of the structure below (the columns break every 10-12 meters like spaghetti).
6. The upper
block lands intact on a heap of rubble after a successful
push-down of the tower
7. The
upper block finally self-destructs in a
push-up of the rubble.
The WTC1 58 meters high
upper block evidently implodes before anything happens to the structure below. Clearly seen on all videos - it shortens itself at least 20 meters. Only random fires are seen up in the
upper block itself and very few below it.
Very strange implosion, to say the least. Cannot have been caused by some random fires.
So yours and Bazant's paper uses the wrong assumptions right through. One wrong assumption I can accept. But not seven. So your conclusion that gravity force only - the loose
upper block - caused the collapse of steel structure/columns that followed is invalid unless you can prove your seven assumptions to start with. Remember that your reputation is at stake.
If you want to discuss other topics, pls start a new thread about it.
)
