Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
9/11 Science Club: Mass Does Not Accelerate as it Accumulates, It Can Only Slow Down
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Btodd" data-source="post: 62273178" data-attributes="member: 14939"><p>Your wording gives it away...'knocked' over. What's pushing it? I'm not saying that a damaged building cannot fall over under any circumstances, but given the damage the Towers sustained, their particular construction, and the ensuing fires...it is not unusual that they fell straight down.</p><p></p><p>And if I can't claim it, then perhaps Thomas W. Eagar from MIT can in the journal JOM?</p><p></p><p><em>"As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.[SIZE=-1]<a href="http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html#ref1" target="_blank">1</a>[/SIZE] <strong>It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made.</strong> First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. <strong>To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.</strong>"</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em></em>Btodd</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Btodd, post: 62273178, member: 14939"] Your wording gives it away...'knocked' over. What's pushing it? I'm not saying that a damaged building cannot fall over under any circumstances, but given the damage the Towers sustained, their particular construction, and the ensuing fires...it is not unusual that they fell straight down. And if I can't claim it, then perhaps Thomas W. Eagar from MIT can in the journal JOM? [I]"As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.[SIZE=-1][URL="http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html#ref1"]1[/URL][/SIZE] [B]It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made.[/B] First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. [B]To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.[/B]" [/I]Btodd [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
9/11 Science Club: Mass Does Not Accelerate as it Accumulates, It Can Only Slow Down
Top
Bottom