[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
This sort of discussion with billy is useless. There is no form of proof that he would accept. I doubt that they weighed every piece of debris that they hauled to a landfill, and even if they did, and even if you had access to the landfill records, he would claim that they were fake or inaccurate. He obviously will claim that estimates in news reports are inaccurate or manip
Photographic evidence.
Except all the crap hidden in the basement. What a clown.
Anyway for y'all NIST fanboys/girls:
According to YOU: the top floor number 110 accelerated FROM REST at a rate of g (with no inertial resistance from supports buckling inwards - YOUR claim) and collided with floor 109. Floor 109 accelerated FROM REST. Ignoring air resistance (for a floor area of this magnitude hardly correct but let's be generous), floor 110 moves down a distance of 3.8 m (total height 416 m ÷ 110 floors) at a rate 10 m/s2. Its velocity on contact with the floor below is thus circa
v2 =u2+2as
v=sqrt(2×10×3.8)= 8.7 m/s.
Average floor mass = 4.1m kg.
Conservation of momentum gives
8.7×4.1×10E6 = 8.2×10E6 x v
So initial velocity of first 2 pancaked floors is
v = 4.4 m/s.
These then fall together at a rate of 10 m/s2. Again ignoring any inertial resistance from inward buckling and air resistance. Not likely but whatever.
Final v of first 2 floors is:
v = sqrt (4.4^2 + 2 × 10 × 3.8)
= 9.8 m/s.
Floors 110 and 109 collide with floor 108 giving:
8.2 × 10E6 × 9.8 = 12.3 × 10E6 × v
v = 6.5 m/s.
Final v of first 3 floors is thus:
v = sqrt (6.5^2 + 2 × 10 × 3.8)
=10.9 m/s.
Let us pause and reflect.
In fact, all we need do is to show that the acceleration is not uniform, which would be required with a free fall model.
For a freefall rate collapse, after 3 floors the distance is 3 × 3.8 m = 11.4 m. The velocity after 3 floors must be
v = sqrt(2 × 10 × 11.4) = 15.1 m/s.
That is 50% greater than the velocity predicted for a progressive collapse.
We could keep going (computer nerds out there I know full well you could code the above calcs for all 110 floors).
But i think you get the point. Progressive collapse is impossible.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Obviously, but there is no reason to doubt they weighed the debris. Trucks have a capacity and are weighed regularly.
And don't mistake this for a discussion. billy is strutting around here taking a dump all over the place, not discussing anything. I'm simply making sure people reading have the facts and know where they come from.
And making fun of him, as he deserves, of course.
Oh yes, history.com with no citation.
Pal you are the comic relief here son.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Photographic evidence.Except all the crap hidden in the basement. What a clown.Anyway for y'all NIST fanboys/girls:According to YOU: the top floor number 110 accelerated FROM REST at a rate of g (with no inertial resistance from supports buckling inwards - YOUR claim) and collided with floor 109. Floor 109 accelerated FROM REST. Ignoring air resistance (for a floor area of this
No.
@Billy - a cursory search shows that the initial point of failure when north tower collapsed was between floors 93 and 99 and when south tower collapsed it was between 77 and 85. So your initial mass is not one floor, it's somewhere between 11 and 33 floors, therefore your conservation of momentum calculation needs to take that into account. Or just re-do the calculation for a building with, say, 90 floors but the first one weighs 20x the others, and add some small amount of time at the end for the remaining 11-33 floors to collapse on each other (they're going pretty quickly by the time the collapse point reaches the ground).
I think you'll find once you make these adjustments your numbers come out completely different. For example, you have the second floor going about half the speed of the floor that fell on it, which makes sense because they're the same mass. Once you increase the load that fell on it to 20x the mass, you'll probably find that it's going pretty much the same speed as whatever fell on it, same as when a human gets hit by a speeding car.
Basically, a building that starts progressively collapsing from the middle down should collapse a lot faster than a building that starts progressively collapsing from the top down (all else being equal). If I could be bothered, I'd work out the equation that gives time to collapse as a function of collapse floor / total floors, differentiate it, and find the "optimal" collapse point for the fastest collapse. But this is your show, so fix your assumptions and see how it comes out.
@Billy - a cursory search shows that the initial point of failure when north tower collapsed was between floors 93 and 99 and when south tower collapsed it was between 77 and 85. So your initial mass is not one floor, it's somewhere between 11 and 33 floors, therefore your conservation of momentum calculation needs to take that into account. Or just re-do the calculation for a
Yada yada. Show the numbers.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Are you suggesting that you not only saw the entirety of the debris in photographs, but you were able to ascertain its weight from this?
For someone who has such stringent standards for scientific experiment and evidence, you sure seem to be content with very hand wavy "proofs by just looking at it" when it comes to substantiating your own claims.
Are you suggesting that you not only saw the entirety of the debris in photographs, but you were able to ascertain its weight from this?
For someone who has such stringent standards for scientific experiment and evidence, you sure seem to be content with very hand wavy "proofs by just looking at it" when it comes to substantiating your own claims.
Your pony is slow.
Sure. You have:
v=sqrt(2×10×3.8)= 8.7 m/s.
Average floor mass = 4.1m kg.
Conservation of momentum gives
8.7×4.1×10E6 = 8.2×10E6 x v
So initial velocity of first 2 pancaked floors is
v = 4.4 m/s.
The correct calculation, (assuming for argument's sake that the collapse started on floor 90), would be as follows:
v=sqrt(2×10×3.8)= 8.7 m/s.
Average floor mass = 4.1m kg.
Conservation of momentum gives
8.7×4.1×20×10E6 = 4.1×21×10E6 x v
So initial velocity of first 2 pancaked floors is
v = 8.3 m/s.
Thereby invalidating the entirety of the rest of your calculation.
I have a sneaking suspicion we won't be seeing Billy for a while after making such a ridiculous rookie mistake.
Oh yes, history.com with no citation.
Pal you are the comic relief here son.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
I cited two sources. You only refer to the second one and have ignored the other every time. Why?
You have ZERO sources, dumbass. Shut your mouth until you have at least one.
You first.
LOL at the explicit "proof by just look at it." You are not a serious person.
Also, provide the photo(s) or video(s) you are using to make your (wild guess) estimate so we can point out your numerous mistakes and laugh at you some more please.
Nah man, I like Billy, he's entertaining. Much better than that tit Deuces.
Billy, if you admit you ****ed up, I'll work out the function that takes building height in floors, floor mass and point of collapse as inputs and gives you the time to collapse as output. If you ask nicely.
It should agree with your calculations for collapse from the top floor down, assuming you did them correctly.
Mind, that was exactly the point of the paper by Bazant et al (to prove there was enough energy to cause a progressive collapse) even though Deuces thinks his simplified model was meant to perfectly describe the collapse mechanisms and valiantly battles that straw man as if he's a hero.
Good lord this thread is an embarrassment of doofuses.
edit to add link to paper:
https://math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asc...
Yeah, I mean I'm no structural engineer. I'm just offering find a closed form for Billy's own calculation to save him working it out floor by floor.
Yeah, I mean I'm no structural engineer. I'm just offering find a closed form for Billy's own calculation to save him working it out floor by floor.
Yeah. I deleted my post because I didn't really want to distract from what you're doing and get into the weeds with billy or deuces over that when it's more than enough to just point out his toddler level errors.
Sure. You have:
The correct calculation, (assuming for argument's sake that the collapse started on floor 90), would be as follows:
v=sqrt(2×10×3.8)= 8.7 m/s.
Average floor mass = 4.1m kg.
Conservation of momentum gives
8.7×4.1×20×10E6 = 4.1×21×10E6 x v
So initial velocity of first 2 pancaked floors is
v = 8.3 m/s.
Thereby invalidating the entirety of the rest of your calculation.
Show the subsequent floors as I did and show how free fall collapse is possible with your new model.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
I have a sneaking suspicion we won't be seeing Billy for a while after making such a ridiculous rookie mistake.
Your suspicion is wrong.
Your calc (totally false premises but whatever) does not allow a free fall collapse time as asserted by nist.
Notice you will not assert nist's time of 10 s as your own fact. Because you know this is not possible.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Show the subsequent floors as I did and show how free fall collapse is possible with your new model.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
My dude, I did not claim "free fall collapse" is possible, whatever "free fall collapse" even means. I'm not showing you ****, although I might find the function later for funsies anyway when I have a pen and paper handy, then plug in the numbers and see what comes out.
I asked you to show your work for arriving at the collapse time figures you keep throwing around. I am happy that your figures are trash because your calculations are based on an invalid assumption that the collapse started on the top floor. Why don't you fix your calculations and come back with some new figures, then we'll talk.
And are you going to address the fact that your only evidence for the 180k tonnes of debris is that you looked at some photos? Lol Billy, not a great showing from you today. You're better off sticking to horizon dip stuff.
