The Physics Of WTC 7

[KokomoJojo]

Free fall from that height would take 9.22 seconds. It took the Tower about 21 seconds to hit the ground. Therefore in the strict science of physics the Tower could not have been in free fall.

I disagree.

here is a known demolition, the supports are blasted away and the building goes into freefall.

"sectionally", we know its a demolition it still officially went into freefall (sectionally) did it not?

so can we legitimately argue that the building did not go into freefall because the whole start to finish process of the building hitting the floor took 30 seconds rather than 4 or 5?

I say no

So in a strictly science sense each section would need to be analyzed separately and at best maybe one section or another did not freefall, however it appears wtc 7 freefell sectionally very similar to the building shown above that is in fact a known demolition.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Nothing you did KokomoJojo.... I just wanted a clean thread. I asked the Moderator in "Science" to help me with that, but instead of helping me, he/she/it just went ahead and dumped a straightforward science question into the "Consptracy Theory" section.

Plus.... There's something positively creepy about the way posters like daws101 (among others) carry on. I wouldn't say they're government sock puppets.... but it definitely wouldn't surprise me if it turned out they were either. I'm done.... there are other things to see.

Take care man.... See you down the old trail!

its beyond theory now days, I am surprised that indictments havent been rolling out. Government socks? I hope so. Absofuckinglutely love em. I get more sadistic pleasure demonstrating what pshycopathic loonartick fucktards they are than you could ever imagine. They have no choice but to try and hold the official line and will go to ANY extreme and put up ANY level of bullshit to try and save their sinking titanic asses.

Unfortunately they always put me on iggy after a few times so its not as much fun as it used to be.

Seriously, I am very surprised indictments arent rolling out yet.

I think the problem the boards have is that its difficult to argue the physics of 911 without at some point it turning into a conspiracy fight because like chandler complains about nist is withholding information from us so we cannot check anything they did. Charges should be filed.

 

[Dante]

If all the support girders have already broken, then you do get close to free-fall speeds, at least until the fall reaches a still-reinforced section. That's exactly what happened with WTC7 during those 2.25 seconds.

Hence, Sunder is correct. There were no supporting elements below, because the support girders had broken.

Chandler, however, is out to lunch. "External force" is evasive babble, because girders are always under "external force". It doesn't require a controlled demolition to break a girder, there is zero evidence of any controlled demolition, and none of the controlled demolition theories make any sense at all.

Interesting: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Popular Mechanics

We took conspiracy theorists at their word when they said they wanted to understand these anomalous facts. We dug as deeply as we could for answers. In every case that PM has investigated to date, the very evidence 9/11 conspiracy theorists use to support their arguments have turned out to be mistaken, misinterpreted or taken wildly out of context.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Interesting: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - World Trade Center - Popular Mechanics

We took conspiracy theorists at their word when they said they wanted to understand these anomalous facts. We dug as deeply as we could for answers. In every case that PM has investigated to date, the very evidence 9/11 conspiracy theorists use to support their arguments have turned out to be mistaken, misinterpreted or taken wildly out of context.

Except of course that they have become the most ridiculed patently bullshit source on the planet.

They used to be in virtually every waiting room and now you are lucky to find them on a magazine stand.

Maybe its a conspiracy?

Either way the quickest way to flag yourself as a 911 NOOB is to post the most highly discredited piece known to date.

 

[daws101]

Nothing you did KokomoJojo.... I just wanted a clean thread. I asked the Moderator in "Science" to help me with that, but instead of helping me, he/she/it just went ahead and dumped a straightforward science question into the "Consptracy Theory" section.

Plus.... There's something positively creepy about the way posters like daws101 (among others) carry on. I wouldn't say they're government sock puppets.... but it definitely wouldn't surprise me if it turned out they were either. I'm done.... there are other things to see.

Take care man....

See you down the old trail !

another one bites the dust!

 

[Derideo_Te]

[MENTION=45807]E.L.C.[/MENTION] Imagine a section of a bridge that is supported at both ends. What happens if the support at one end breaks? That end will fall at "free fall" speed, right?

WTC was built as a "bridge" structure over a power substation. It used what was called a cantilever construction. The heat from the prolonged and uncontrolled fires caused sufficient expansion to push one of the cantilever's off it's support.

Gravity did the rest. This is all in the official NIST report.

 

[KokomoJojo]

@E.L.C. Imagine a section of a bridge that is supported at both ends. What happens if the support at one end breaks? That end will fall at "free fall" speed, right?

WTC was built as a "bridge" structure over a power substation. It used what was called a cantilever construction. The heat from the prolonged and uncontrolled fires caused sufficient expansion to push one of the cantilever's off it's support.

Gravity did the rest. This is all in the official NIST report.

impossible

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7v8EgCzJM]WTC7 - The Stiffener Plates Explained - YouTube[/ame]

 

[E.L.C.]

Damn you KokomoJojo! You're right! I can't stop posting either.... This is simply more fun than any one man could be expected to bear! It's like an addiction, some strange new form of internet-electro-narcosis! YES! YES! YEEESSSSSSS!!!! I must and I will continue to post. I'll be (even though I think this may possibly be a fraud site in view of my experience up to this point, it may still hold some kind of redeeming value as a sort of "Comedy Central" of science, which is fine with me. I'm 55 now.... that really is me in the avatar.... and have no children so as you might imagine, I have very little, if any, vested interest in the next generation, the last generation.... or even this generation! To top it all off, I'm a suicidal procrastinator, so I'm pretty much ready for anything 24/7, if you get my meaning. It's been a wild ride my freind! Though I didn't want to admit it openly, I really do find all the swearing and name calling to be very, very therapeutic. I hope that's not too much for everyone to digest parenthetically but.... It is what it is as they say, and that's the way it is.) especially be looking forward to yours KokomoJojo. Very cool GIF animations (sorry to add another parenthetical, but you should know people (here's a parenthetical within a parenthitical, which may cause some cognitive dissonance for weak minded people, for the rest of us though it's no problem..... just wanted to add that people, like me, may be stealing your work), like me, may be stealing your work. We'll talk again soon son (do you mind if I add another parenthetical?), something tells me (a third parenthetical (after the last parenthetical) just to indicate to everyone that I very much admire you), that's the way it goes when you run into someone you like (I'm sure all would agree).

Now that I've clearly described my theory of the collapse of WTC 7 (very, even if parenthetically, clearly) in just the short paragraph above (though it may be seen by some small minded people to be largely parenthetical), I'd like some kind of real feedback on the whole thing that really conforms to physical principles! Is that too much to ask ?!?!?!

 

[whitehall]

I guess the FF physics theory is out the window when the scientific analysis indicates that the buildings were not in "free fall". So what do the tin foil hats fall back on?

 

[KokomoJojo]

Now that I've clearly described my theory of the collapse of WTC 7

I'd like some kind of real feedback on the whole thing that really conforms to physical principles! Is that too much to ask ?!?!?!

The gifs are because the greater majority of official tail spinners have little to no clue or personal experience with any of this, so they need things put in a crystal clear format, you know have to draw them a picture before they stand a chance to "get it".

That and for others just farting around and surfing who have no formal physics background at all and they can see that [read my footer] in reality truthers are not dealing with academia on the official side but fucktards who are incapable of getting beyond their own ride up da nile.

That little physics problem I posted that none of them are capable of figgering out is a good example of how tarded they are. One gave the wrong answer so far and 2 fell into the first tard trap and I am having the time of my life with that.

Once ya understand these people or its whatever they are, are as dysfunctional as a screen door in a submarine it casts a whole new light on the debate. you will have many good laughs

 

[KokomoJojo]

I guess the FF physics theory is out the window when the scientific analysis indicates that the buildings were not in "free fall". So what do the tin foil hats fall back on?

this is the revised graph from nist. what can you gleen from it? freefall or not?

 

[E.L.C.]

whitehall ".... the scientific analysis indicates that the buildings were not in "free fall". So what do the tin foil hats fall back on?"

Oh thanks, I've been waiting for someone to give me a good reason to say.... "You're full of shit". So just let me say.... you're full of shit!

 

[Politico]

Nothing you did KokomoJojo.... I just wanted a clean thread. I asked the Moderator in "Science" to help me with that, but instead of helping me, he/she/it just went ahead and dumped a straightforward science question into the "Consptracy Theory" section.

Plus.... There's something positively creepy about the way posters like daws101 (among others) carry on. I wouldn't say they're government sock puppets.... but it definitely wouldn't surprise me if it turned out they were either. I'm done.... there are other things to see.

Take care man....

See you down the old trail !

It got moved because it is a conspiracy.. And damn it daws why haven't you gotten back to me? I need some work and I writes good.

 

[Gamolon]

Now that I've clearly described my theory of the collapse of WTC 7 (very, even if parenthetically, clearly) in just the short paragraph above (though it may be seen by some small minded people to be largely parenthetical), I'd like some kind of real feedback on the whole thing that really conforms to physical principles! Is that too much to ask ?!?!?!

You need to think of buildings as a system of many, many components all connected together to achieve one thing, which is to stay erect while resisting/supporting loads. Not only are they designed to support their own structure, but other loads as well. Loads that change. People, wind, snow, and changing internal office layouts (cubicles, computers, etc.) to name a few.

If you weaken or remove one item in the structural system (columns, connection, floor truss), every other component has to pick up the slack.

There are also structural subsystems within the structure. For example, a flooring subsystem. Each floor is designed to support a certain load based upon usage, people, etc. The floor will transfer the load upon it, through floor trusses, to the columns, which transfer that load, in addition to the load of the floors and the rest of the structure above it, to the foundations.

Do you get this so far?

 

[Gamolon]

Example of how loads are transferred through a structure.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Example of how loads are transferred through a structure.

WOW more cut and paste, now tell us what useful information you think we are supposed get from that lame pretense of knowledge?

btw this is the revised graph from nist. what can you gleen from it? freefall or not?

since you totally fucked up the high school fizix question I suppose I should expect another incorrect answer that you will demand is correct for damage control despite how foolish it is, but what the hell, you need another red face.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7v8EgCzJM"]WTC7 - NIST Collapse Story Impossible - Stiffener Plates Explained[/ame]

 

[Derideo_Te]

@E.L.C. Imagine a section of a bridge that is supported at both ends. What happens if the support at one end breaks? That end will fall at "free fall" speed, right?

WTC was built as a "bridge" structure over a power substation. It used what was called a cantilever construction. The heat from the prolonged and uncontrolled fires caused sufficient expansion to push one of the cantilever's off it's support.

Gravity did the rest. This is all in the official NIST report.

impossible

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7v8EgCzJM]WTC7 - The Stiffener Plates Explained - YouTube[/ame]

Too many false assumptions in that video. Those two plates were simply not thick enough to spread the weight as alleged. His 2 dimensional analysis fails to take into account the 3 dimensional nature of the failure.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

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.​

The destruction of the World Trade Towers were planned-loophole demolitions. Everything from the astronomical insurance on asbestos-infested World Trade Towers to evacuation of buildings on eve of 911/2001 and Arabs easily gaining access to cockpits of US planes are evidence that those buildings were intentionally, unlawfully and cold-bloodedly demolished.


Who Profited? 9-11 Research: Controlling Interests


Asbestos-Infested World Trade Towers - On the ruins of the World Trade Center


Unlawful Demolition Instead Of Abatement - 9-11 Research: Asbestos in the WTC

as always the shills get their asses handed to them on a platter by Eots.I see like always,they run off with their tails between their legs when cornered by that post of mine.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Far out man! Thanks ZenBubba and mamooth. I want to go ahead but this thread has to be clean or I'm getting out of here. I reported the post by 9/11 inside job as having nothing to do with the topic. If this is really a science forum, that post will be removed. I'll post then.... Am I being unreasonable?

You reported it cause the truth hurts you paid shills. I see you had no luck getting the truth removed like you were hoping.

you knew you were cornered and could not refute those facts that prove explosives brought them down,so you got desperate hoping he would delete it.sorry troll.better luck next time.

you know you cant counter it being too much of a chickshit coward to even try.evade,evade,evade.

oh and the laws of physics prove that you agents all skipped junior high school science classes.

 

[KokomoJojo]

@E.L.C. Imagine a section of a bridge that is supported at both ends. What happens if the support at one end breaks? That end will fall at "free fall" speed, right?

WTC was built as a "bridge" structure over a power substation. It used what was called a cantilever construction. The heat from the prolonged and uncontrolled fires caused sufficient expansion to push one of the cantilever's off it's support.

Gravity did the rest. This is all in the official NIST report.

impossible

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7v8EgCzJM"]WTC7 - The Stiffener Plates Explained - YouTube[/ame]

Too many false assumptions in that video. Those two plates were simply not thick enough to spread the weight as alleged. His 2 dimensional analysis fails to take into account the 3 dimensional nature of the failure.

math and cipherin talks bullshit walks which one will it be?