It is so simple that people like me, who come here to learn from people who know a great deal about physics and engineering, understand it completely. It is nothing less than staggering that someone who purports to be an engineer can display this degree of obtuseness.
WTC collapses - Layman's terms again
- Thread starter Heiwa
- Start date
-
- Tags
- wtc collapse
It is so simple that people like me, who come here to learn from people who know a great deal about physics and engineering, understand it completely. It is nothing less than staggering that someone who purports to be an engineer can display this degree of obtuseness.
Jonnyclueless
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 5,546
I'd like to know what requirements were not met.
As an exception I will answer this one.
The lower green floors are part of the indestructible upper block allegedly falling down as described in my article! They have no loads on them except their own weights but are supposed to crush the structure, i.e. the columns, below and everything else. And not be destroyed by structure/columns below.
Nothing was falling on these green floors! They were falling on the lower structure trying to destroy it according to NIST, Bazant and Seffen.
But surprise - they met resistance. They were sliced apart at first contact. By the columns below. But the floors of the upper block were supposed to be solid, indestructible, etc. as per NIST:s, Bazant's, Seffen's fantasiful minds. Minds that destroy matters. Does not happen in the real worlds.
You never read my peer reveiwed paper, stateofgrace?
Now I really have to retire from this thread. But folks - don't worry! I will start another one. About something else. Children and 911. Just wait.
Last edited:
Your "arguments" are so breathtakingly wrong-headed that it is difficult to credit you with sincerity. What exactly are you missing? The inward bowing observable on all videos presaged the failure of the floor trusses. When they gave way, that story AND ALL THE STORIES ABOVE IT fell on the story immediately below.
Where are you experiencing conceptual difficulties? Do you think that the floor that failed initially was the top floor of the building? No, we can rule that out. Do you think that the floors above the one that failed remained suspended in mid-air? Do you think that the floor below the one that failed was designed to support the weight of ALL the floors that just crashed down on it? Do you think that--somehow--we can't add the weight of the floor above the one that failed to the total mass? Of course, that would take us back to the second question.
It would appear as though you are making at least one of these four ridiculous assumptions. Again, can you or Heiwa possibly have a degree in engineering, of all things?
Last edited:
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
Last edited:
By now, you have persuaded most rationalists that you have no peers, only superiors. I would argue that the likes of LastChild, Dictator Cheney, Lyte Trip, and Malcolm Kirkman are your peers.
On the subject of engineering, you are a complete incompetent, ineducable and hopelessly obtuse. Your paper is worthless and no real engineers have ever approved of it. I hesitate to label you a pure fraud as you seem quite ill.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
I don't worry about children's understanding of 9/11. They will go to school and get an education. This should be all that's needed to expose you as a fraud. (Like with the "Estonia")
Why don't you call NIST, ask for Mike Newman, and explain how you have revolutionized the science of physics? Explain to him what the 1,000 serious researchers got wrong. Your lunacy should provide him with a few good laughs.
Incidentally, your worthless and incompetent paper is NOT "peer-reviewed." You got caught lying. Remember?
Last edited:
stateofgrace
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,843
You have not produced a peer reviewed paper to read, stop lying.
The rest of your complete and utter drivel is dismissed.
I do not debate liars. When you start your new thread,liar, maybe you should label it,“I am Liar" or “I am a lying fraud" or better still try a new thread labelled. “I have not got a clue what I am talking about and trying to wing it, in the hope nobody will notice I am a lying fraud".
I look forward to your new thread, liar.
Last edited:
Um, stateofgrace, please don't take this the wrong way. You know I love ya and agree with everything you post, but, did I accidentally sneeze on you or something?
stateofgrace
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,843
These guys are after the truth, the truth is a liar and fraud as been exposed time and time again on this forum. Nobody with an ounce of common sense is going to buy into the rubbish that is promoted by this member.
The truth hurts and it is here for everybody to see.
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
FYI, DC made this with COSMOS, FEA software that comes bundled with SolidWorks. I know this because I use both in my current job (which is similar to what DC described as his job).
The deformation is extremely exaggerated; I zoomed in but I couldn't quite make out the deformation scale (or "Verformungsfaktor" in German, if I'm reading it right) , which is the last line of text in the upper right-hand corner, but it looks like it might be between 700 and 799.
In addition to the other criticisms that have been leveled, DC made the building one solid part, which means that he had to choose only one type of material to use.
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
hi
you are correct
its indeed Cosmos, and deformation is not displayed corectly, i should have writen that under the picture, but i didnt want to show the deformation.
just wanted to illustrate that not only the most upper floor will be affected.
which i understood that some seem to belive.
Btw how is that job called in English?
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
you best ask Spitfire if that is fraudelent modeling. but pls remember i did only want to show that not only the most upper floor is affected, and i also did mention that it is not representing the WTC.
and im sure Spitfire will confirm that Cosmos is not the correct software to do collapse simulations
its a very basic FE software. but its enough for what we need it at work.I saw a debate in another place where they were discussing an accident involving a high pressure compressor.
One person claimed that the compressor had been tampered with, possibly by someone from the management of the firm in order to kill a union official.
Another person claimed that the company who made the compressor was liable as he said those compressors had a known track record of failure (according to wikipedia)
I asked if either of the people discussing this matter was in any way qualified and experienced in high pressure compressors and they both said "No"
I then suggested that perhaps, rather than relying on internet discussion boards and Wikipedia, maybe they should actually find someone who did have the qualifications and experience necessary to explain what had happened to this compressor.
They told me to shut up.
One person claimed that the compressor had been tampered with, possibly by someone from the management of the firm in order to kill a union official.
Another person claimed that the company who made the compressor was liable as he said those compressors had a known track record of failure (according to wikipedia)
I asked if either of the people discussing this matter was in any way qualified and experienced in high pressure compressors and they both said "No"
I then suggested that perhaps, rather than relying on internet discussion boards and Wikipedia, maybe they should actually find someone who did have the qualifications and experience necessary to explain what had happened to this compressor.
They told me to shut up.
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
most in the managment of Compressor comapnys i know, dont know enough about the technical side of compressors to manipulate them. Most come from the "selling" department. the sellers are hated by the technicans, cuase to often they sold our "ideas about new comressors" as working machines, ready for production :/
or what is ment with tampered.
alot of savety is onlovled when you work with such high pressures.
once a "Linsen-Dichtung" was not montaged corectly and when it came under pressure the "Linsen-Dichtung" was pushed out between the 2 flanches.
left a huge hole in the relative thick stonewall and the "explosion" shaked the whole block.
also "Ermeto" fitings can be dangerous when not handled correctly.
ETA: Can you tell me what company?
Last edited:
AZCat
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,672
"Linsen-dictung" - elliptical seal ring? Or is it a brand name? What kind of compressor was it?
OlbarStein
Scholar
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2008
- Messages
- 53
What I don't understand is that an engineer and a ship constructor don't understand the basic facts about physics that I learned in high school?!
As I understand it Heiwa seems to think that vertical accelerating forces involved between the upper and lower part of the towers are comparable to his knowledge about the horizontal deccelerating forces between colliding ships!?
How can't he know about the simple rules of pressure (the smaller the area of the force the higher the pressure).
How can he claim that the floors which where built to withstand horizontal forces should be able to hold the vertical forces of the upper part of the building?
How can he dismiss the huge potential and kinetic energies involved in the collapse?
How can he claim all this and still consider himself an expert of the subject?
Btw I am only asking questions. ;-)
Ps: I only had basic physics courses in high school.
As I understand it Heiwa seems to think that vertical accelerating forces involved between the upper and lower part of the towers are comparable to his knowledge about the horizontal deccelerating forces between colliding ships!?
How can't he know about the simple rules of pressure (the smaller the area of the force the higher the pressure).
How can he claim that the floors which where built to withstand horizontal forces should be able to hold the vertical forces of the upper part of the building?
How can he dismiss the huge potential and kinetic energies involved in the collapse?
How can he claim all this and still consider himself an expert of the subject?
Btw I am only asking questions. ;-)
Ps: I only had basic physics courses in high school.
Last edited:
