Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 03:07pm PT
|
This thread has become a lot like a geeky climber physic thread where everybody has the math to show that a daisy fall will kill you and anchors are sure to fail in a factor 2 fall.
Lots of math, many, many untold variables can't be accounted for and are left out, and the result of the math proves little, because many of us have actually taken daisy falls and lived to tell about it.
Follow the people, the money, and other events.
Peace
karl
edit: I will say one thing is kinda strange. There buildings collapsing completely is so unusual in the first place, and the towers collapsed from a fire at the top, and building 7 collapse from a fire in the bottom, and yet they all collapsed almost perfectly into their footprints. What are the chances? Sadly the chances of either the conspiracy theory or the official conspiracy theory are both slim. Who knows?
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 03:45pm PT
|
just can the scolding, adam, and speak to the issue. you'd be the dad from hell if you talk to your kids this way, but i'll bet you're the sweetest guy in the world with them because you rag on everyone here.
i do believe i've talked about ronald o. hamburger here, a real expert. you're so full of your manic mode that your attention span doesn't last two posts, and you're so dependent on clicking your links that you can't begin to comprehend anything without it.
_
"sadly the chances of either the conspiracy theory or the official conspiracy theory are both slim."
so, can we have the "fat chance" karl baba theory? bet you're afraid to give it out. you won't be able to strike your above-the-fray stance of reasonability after that.
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 04:07pm PT
|
Karl I will say one thing is kinda strange. There buildings collapsing completely is so unusual in the first place, and the towers collapsed from a fire at the top, and building 7 collapse from a fire in the bottom, and yet they all collapsed almost perfectly into their footprints. What are the chances?
This was posted earlier in the thread.
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=1199984&msg=1218120#msg1218120
Unfortunately, many posters on this thread disbelieve the experts at NIST.
Read this link,
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
Further, other posters have maintained that the WTC was designed to withstand impact from a 707. Here is what NIST said about it....
As stated in Section 5.3.2 of NIST NCSTAR 1, a document from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) indicated that the impact of a [single, not multiple] Boeing 707 aircraft was analyzed during the design stage of the WTC towers. However, NIST investigators were unable to locate any documentation of the criteria and method used in the impact analysis and, therefore, were unable to verify the assertion that “… such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building.…”
I have over 20 years of Engineering experience on some extremely complex projects. That bold statement is unfortunately, common place as there are always difficult questions and sometimes there are "expert" opinions on what constitutes acceptable "defense in depth", or in other words, the calculations that would support certain assertions. I was first employed as an Engineer in MO, the Show Me state.
I am showing you now, experts detailing how the WTC failed within the NIST report. This is the same type of information that many conspiracy theorists blow off because the technical explanation does not match their own belief.
Peace back at you bro..
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 04:10pm PT
|
Gonna cal BS on this, Tony: i've argued this stuff in much more dignified forums and questioned real experts on both sides. the experts on the government side all stand on shaky legs and keep the back doors open for a speedy retreat. .
Simple for you to prove you did as you say though... Link please.
I'd love to see these "real experts on both sides" that you have questioned. Bonus points if you had them in retreat.
Ooooh.... Busted talking out of your arse. Actually... What do they call people that make things up about themselves and state them as fact? Liars.
Link please.
You penned yourself into a corner now, as you can easily give us a link to said form, with said experts on both sides that you have questioned. Unless of course, you are lying, then all you can do is ignore this and/or offer up some retort, but still sans link.
See, this is what I have been doing in this thread... Poking holes in, and exposing such obvious crap for what it is, crap.
As I've said, I copy and paste the crap into a quote, then directly refute it.
Prove me wrong... Link please. I will gladly acknowledge I am wrong, and even apologize, as you will deserve it if you are not lying.
It's as simple as copy and paste into this thread by hitting this button:
But you are lying, arent you? Which is why you cannot/will not provide a link.
Link please.
And I do "speak to the issue"... When I see something posted as fact, that I can easily disprove, I copy and paste the false statement or belief, and show where and/or how it is wrong. Transparently, no lying or making sh#t up, often with the relevant material to show this beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt..
Just so happens that the last "issue" was you LYING trying to add some dredibility to your arguments... You got caught. There is no doubt that you just got caught lying.
And I don't "rag on everyone here"... I ridicule those worthy of ridicule (very few actually) because they confidently believe and state things that are incorrect, some even demonstratably absurd. BUT, this is AFTER I calmly try to explain where they are wrong... When people say "show me", are shown, only to ignore it, then say "show me", they are worthy of ridicule.
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 04:51pm PT
|
The crux of these kind of threads is, convincing the idiot that he's an idiot, when he thinks he knows a lot (but doesn't), and has access to info from a lot of other internet idiots who think they know a lot (but don't), while at the same time he is trying to convince you that you're an idiot who thinks he knows a lot (but doesn't) and has access to a lot of other internet idiots who think they know a lot (but don't).
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 04:55pm PT
|
Jolly said:
Dropping the top 15 floors, 15 feet creates a huge impact force. Using that force at the time of impact, he was able to determine the deceleration of that mass.
So Jolly, the 15 floors were accelerating at 9.8m/sec^2 when it hit the first foor. He then calculates the floor slowed the acceleration by .0223m/sec^2. Fair enough, even though the calculation reasoning is absurd.
But instead of subtracting .0223 from 9.8, he uses -.0223 as the acceleration for the block all the way to the ground and does not consider that gravity is still acting on the block.
Does that make sense to you Jolly, being an engineer and all?
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 04:57pm PT
|
Jolly, as I've said, NUMEROUS times... He is doing the math all wrong, then says there is a net upward force.
Go look where he does this up till 3:29 in that video... It still locks up on me after that.
But the FACT is, he is doing this:
-669,700,620
+668,181,816 = ma
Note that the bottom figure is the MASS of the top floors, yet he has is using that as a force (f=ma, remember?)
And comes up with:
a = -.0223 m/s^2 NEGATIVE ACCELERATION
That is f*#king absurd, and you should see that... Especially since it's been spelled out for you NUMEROUS times.
In order to calculate f:
You need to multiply m (the top of the building) times a (gravity)
THEN all that DYNAMIC force (f, remember) is what smashes into the floor below it, adding to m (mass), subtracting resistance, then applying a (acceleration) AGAIN to the already moving increased mass. Rinse and REPEAT all the way down.
If, as has been said (I wish I could get that far into the vid), he is NOT calcing in the continued acceleration from gravity working on it all the way down, and only subtracting for what he beleives resistance will offer, that is equally just as absurd.
And really calls into question your ability to think clearly.
GIGO!
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 05:01pm PT
|
there is a net upward force.
The Illuminati must have access to anti-gravity technology.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 05:07pm PT
|
there is a net upward force.
The Illuminati must have access to anti-gravity technology.
Pssst...it's upsidasium.
Four prominent Illuminati/The They members who were involved in this and the 9/11 plot:
L to R: Boris, Natasha and Fearless Leader
L to R: Bullwinkle, Rocky, and the sinister Mr. Big.
|
|
golsen
Social climber
kennewick, wa
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 05:17pm PT
|
The crux of these kind of threads is, convincing the idiot that he's an idiot, when he thinks he knows a lot (but doesn't), and has access to info from a lot of other internet idiots who think they know a lot (but don't), while at the same time he is trying to convince you that you're an idiot who thinks he knows a lot (but doesn't) and has access to a lot of other internet idiots who think they know a lot (but don't).
Dooooooooooooooooooooood,
you seem to know a lot about idiots.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 05:27pm PT
|
Jolly said:
#1 - if it is that easy for a building to fall within itself, why do demolition companies spend months figuring the points, and sequence to bring down a building. If we could just take out one floor and let "GRAVITY" do its trick, using this phenomenal "Dynamic" physics, which is complete and absolutely flawless. Then why don't we do it. Why?
Cuz they don't want the building to spew debris for hundreds of yards and damage other buildings. Kinda like what happened to WTC7 you know.
You do know that more then 20 buildings were damaged that day right?
#2 - Do you really believe that two completely seperate impacts, and different levels and angles would bring the same result. Wouldn't the one that was hit lower, have the faster rate of Fall using your theories? Why is it they are within a second of each other.
They were not within a second of each other. The best videos and audio show at least 3 seconds difference.
Coffee break over, back to work.
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:00pm PT
|
That mass that already decelerated. would then collect the remaining mass of the floor it collided with. At the point of impact..... 0.000001inches the deceleration in his exercise was 0.023. Now that mass doesn't have another 15ft of air to fall thru, it has 15ft of mass to fall thru. It would continually decelerate thru that mass. Colliding with the next floor, meeting resistance again, and again, and again. All the way down. He made it simple and kept it consistant. To actually calc it would take a lot of time.
What the hell are you talking about?
Each consecutive floor will cause less deceleration. It will continually accelerate.
As the falling mass increases and accelerates, each floor will provide the same amount of resistance as the floor above it did, but as far as how much they will slow things down, the lower floors might as well have been made of rice paper.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:00pm PT
|
Tony wrote
so, can we have the "fat chance" karl baba theory? bet you're afraid to give it out. you won't be able to strike your above-the-fray stance of reasonability after that.
Baba admits he doesn't know and therefore can't have a plausible theory. I know it stinks and an aggressive investigation needs to happen but won't because nobody in power wants to know. Even if it were an inside job, nobody in power would want to expose that.
just like the Iraq war. It was a conspiracy, totally unjust. We knew there weren't WMDs. But if we prove it was, we're liable so we'll never convict ourselves.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:14pm PT
|
the lower floors might as well have been made of rice paper
Wanda, hate to break it to you but you got the wrong kind of paper...
|
|
rrrADAM
Trad climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:42pm PT
|
+668,181,816 (Bottom #) = ma
Note that the bottom figure is the MASS of the top floors, yet he has is using that as a force (f=ma, remember?)
Lets see. The mass of the top floors is 13.63% of 500,000tons; or 68,181.81Tons. Got it good.
Now F=ma soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooF =68,181.81Tx9.8m/s
Which is..........................you guessed it. 668,181,816N
Pay attention.
68,181.81Tons x 9.8 m/s^2 is NOT 668,181,816 N, when it only falls 15' before it impats the floor you are trying to calc the failure for. It is far less than that, do the math AGAIN, but this time correctly, as it would impact the floor in less than a second, so you cannot mearly multiply by 9.8.. Remember, there is a m/s^2 there, So you need to do math correctly. His numbers for the the resistance of the floor it impacts is also far less than he calculated, more so that the dynamic load he miscalced, so again GIGO!
You/he is still grossly misunderstanding the dynamics of this if you believe that it will fall through 15' of mass, thus continual mass, all the way down. Hell, air is mass, so that is misleadnig.
The major component of resistance is when the falling mass meets each floor. Stating, and assuming otherwise in the calcs, leads to GIGO. Until the falling mass encountered another floor, it continued to accelerate, as the steel skin provided little resistance compared to the floors joined to the core. This is what is being left out.
When all that DYNAMIC mass smashed through the floor below it, it sheared or bent the supports that support and join the floor to the core, and did so all the way down gaining mass an momentum all the way down. Doing so (shearing or bending these members), SEVERELY damaged and weakened the core, the part of the structure that held up the lions share of the structure, and it collapsed right behind it... Which is why you can see pics of the core still standing, up to 60 floors(?) just seconds after the fall. SINCE it was so damaaged, it too fell. If you look closely at the pics of the standing core, you can see many of these members bent, straight down.
I give up with you dude... You arecurrently beyond help.
I am confident that at some time you will pull your head out of your ass, perhaops when someone whom you respect tells you you are wrong, and explains it to you.
Just remember, many tried to tell you here, for weeks, and you just wouldn't listen.
|
|
WandaFuca
Social climber
From the gettin place
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:51pm PT
|
What are you talking about. You clearly don't understand structures. Each subsequesnt floor is stronger than the one above it. This means more resistance. The basement floors need to carry 500,000tons(9.8), or 4,900,000N. The 95th floor has to hold a force of 668,700N. Keep in mind the lack of a safety factor in these numbers, which is in an order of a factor of 4.
Your idiocy is breathtaking.
No floor "held" the weight of any of the floors above. The core held (cantilevered) the weight of all the floors.
Each and every floor was only designed to hold its own weight plus 1,300 tons.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:55pm PT
|
Some posters here seem to live in a world where gravity causes things to decelerate as they fall.
|
|
Captain...or Skully
Big Wall climber
Transporter Room 2
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 06:58pm PT
|
Rediculous is my favorite color.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2010 - 07:32pm PT
|
Jolly, yes you are right, I was thinking collapse time.
The collapse rate is similar because neither block fell to the ground intact.
As the blocks were crushing floors, their floors were also being crushed. See Bazant.
After both blocks were crushed, there was about the same amount of crushing debris in the building boundary, as the excess was continually spewing out.
Another way to think of how absurd it is for your youtube guy to use -.0223 acceleration all the way to the ground is to think of the power necessary to accelerate a 15 floor block upwards at .0223m/s^2 against gravity. The first floor impact energy is just not going to be anything near that.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!