E.L.C.
Member
- Oct 29, 2013
- 89
- 3
- 6
So I'll take a chance and put this here. It's not about conspiracy, how it could have been done, why it might have been done or who might have done it.... Please, just the physics. Critique this analysis, add to it, or just pick the one that you think is correct and why.... sort of an informal pole/discussion?
THE UNRESOLVED MYSTERY OF WTC 7
Images courtesy of KokomoJojo
Shyam Sunder, of the NIST, states free fall only happens when an object (or building) ...has no structural components below it. He says despite the existence of structural components (mass) below it, WTC 7 went into free fall as if through air for eight stories, or 105 feet.
David Chandler, a retired physics teacher, states free fall only happens (to a building) when an "....external force removes the supporting structure." He says energy would have to to be added from some external source to remove structural components (mass) below it for free fall to occur as if through air for eight stories, or 105 feet.
Chart courtesy of KokomoJojo
They agree that WTC 7 fell at gravitational acceleration for 2.25 seconds, or 105 feet but....
There can be only one, they cannot both be true.... Or can they?
Is it Chandler on the left, or Sunder on the right?
My schematic animated representations of both theories.
Images courtesy of KokomoJojo
Shyam Sunder, of the NIST, states free fall only happens when an object (or building) ...has no structural components below it. He says despite the existence of structural components (mass) below it, WTC 7 went into free fall as if through air for eight stories, or 105 feet.
David Chandler, a retired physics teacher, states free fall only happens (to a building) when an "....external force removes the supporting structure." He says energy would have to to be added from some external source to remove structural components (mass) below it for free fall to occur as if through air for eight stories, or 105 feet.
Chart courtesy of KokomoJojo
They agree that WTC 7 fell at gravitational acceleration for 2.25 seconds, or 105 feet but....
There can be only one, they cannot both be true.... Or can they?
Is it Chandler on the left, or Sunder on the right?
My schematic animated representations of both theories.
Last edited: