I am very happy to see the vidoe The mathematical formulas used here are not the proper way for obtaining a real figure but they are based on assumptions in order to obtain after you give this
I Love The Video It Can Increase My Knowledge The mathematical formulas used here are not the proper way for obtaining a real figure but they are based on assumptions
Steady I Really Like This Video The mathematical formulas used here are not the proper way for obtaining a real figure but they are based on assumptions in order to obtain a value fore the absolute minimum time needed for the collapse process.
I have a 9/11 playlist that explains a little but still there are weird things about 9/11. Weird things happen when huge jets fly through the center of a building fast as they can go full of fuel like a commet right through main beams, blasting off the fireproofing from the rest of the beams and soften the beams and bolts. An avalanche goes faster as more mass pushes down but that is snow.
@MrREAPER2014 The fires were mostly burned out by the time of the collapse. The jet fuel that spilled down the elevator shafts burned out in minutes. Otherwise the firemen could not have ridden the elevators as far as they did.
@Skeptic121 Sorry man but I just don't buy the 9/11 inside job story at all. If one day there is real proof showing that someone other than extremist muslims did it in the name of alah and islam, the same extremist that behead children in Thailand trying to force an islamic state, the same extremist that are killing people even their own muslim women and children. I know there are good and bad people in every race and every nation. I also know it says to lie to us infidels to "try" to dominate
@Skeptic121 There was fuel exploding in the shafts up till the last people ran out, the police saw the towers leaning and swaying a bit before they fell and they knew it would fall. I will eat shit if they show me proof that someone other than the same extremist muslims who are kiling thousands all over the world. It's like saying our buildings are God like and should still be standing even if the world exploded, a building has never fell like that cuz we never had jets go through them before...
@Skeptic121 look at the playlist 9/11 FACTS, of course this does not explain everything and there are strange things about it. We still know extremist muslims we taught to fly and let come to our free nation flew into buildings, was it an inside job, hell yeah it was MUSLIMS INSIDE AMERICA KILLING AMERICANS! If there was something planted there in the buildings guess what, their muslim friends planted it there for months before the attack, we have people from the mideast working here you know?
@Skeptic121 Boy will feel stupid if they ever show me proof that santa or some alien or the cia....maybe santa, bush and the zionist's I have never seen one of those before but maybe they did it. Till I see proof I know who did it...in fact well after 9/11 there was a mosque not long ago in south Florida sending at least $53,000 to the taliban in pakistan. Why do you NEVER see "moserate muslims" working so hard to fight their own extremist people, there either fighting the infidel or some bs...
No I'm making a point...so if you and I both know the fact that they flew into buildings what do you think the cia, bush or some zionist blew the building up from the inside just so that the already "islamic extremist muslims" terror job was even bigger than even they expected it to be...
It's like saying we know the USA dropped the bomb on Japan but a group who don't want people to think that says some of santa's helpers did it instead...just don't make sense!
@MrREAPER2014 You can't ANSWER the real question raised by the video, so you beat on something else. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe you CAN answer the real question. If so, DO it. Otherwise, just make yourself feel better by spewing insults.
@Skeptic121 If the word santa is an insult then.ok whatever, I have told the guy who made this video I respect his views and he makes plenty of sense but there are of course many questions still. I've worked in the buildings before like that and I know it's nothing but nuts and bolts with fireproofing. Not made to have a huge jet fly throgh full of fuel as fast as it can go. No the insult is my American people getting felt up at air ports like there terrorist,granny and 5 year old grand daughter
@MrREAPER2014 dear sir, you were too good to tell the guy who made this video that you respect his extremely non-expert meaningless equations spewing views. this whole video should have been a SNL skit. an obvious layman pretending to lecture on complex physical phenomenon. a real physicist knows they can't make accurate predictions even for simplest experiments, let alone an unimaginably complex physical phenomenon such as happened on 911. this guy is full of hot air and insulting to boot
@Skeptic121 the only insult here is this video itself - this is the kind of proof that you truthers tout? OMG you guys are even more pathetic than i thought.
@JamesIsViolet All anyone needs to do is ask any nation on Earth where Muslims reach just 3-5% of that nation and ask them who is blowing up shit, beheading children, ftrying to force islamic states in their nation and killing to get it done. Ask any of the nations in my playlist "Educate yourself on this" who is doing all the terror and killing. Then try to tell them santa did it or they did it to themself and you will be hung I bet! Are there good Muslims...of course there is, there are many!
@MrREAPER2014 yes sir! and quite simply, despite this mumbling idiot living in some severely simplified pseudo-physics-derived- half baked equation blathering driven parallel universe, there is zero evidence that 911 was an inside job
Sarcasm is the effort of a bored mind at wit. Never mind what the internet and everyone else is claiming. Just look at the video above and tell me what do you think caused that building to fall down so perfectly vertically inside 6.5 seconds (basically at free fall speed)'
The videos above are not "internet rumors" or "conspiracy theories", they are taken from the TV networks on that day.
What do you think caused that building to collapse?
I appreciate these calculations. Best case scenario is it assumes this block is intact the whole time it's destroying the building and videos show it certainly is not. What is the driving force destroying the structure underneath if the mass of the top portion is being destroyed itself. How can these two destroy each other anyway? Wouldn't the top be intact until it encounters the resistance of hitting the ground?
Asuming the columns were melted by fire, would the columns have been heated enough a few stories down the to reduce the amount of resistance offered? Also weren't the clumns desined to be supported by horizontal plates whick would cause them to fail vertically as center plates were dropping on top of eachother?
only thing i know about physics is each action has an equal & opposite reaction. so if the weight and inertia of the top piece is enough to collapse the floors of the bottom piece wouldnt it also be enough to collapse the floors of the top piece? which means the collapse would eventually come to a stop since there r less floors on the top piece than the bottom piece? i asked this B4 i saw this video and im a HS drop out. im wondering why there are so many people arent asking the same thing
If we accept your 68,000 tons for the upper 15 floors, and then drop this mass 12 feet onto the supporting structure, it will hit with 1.6 Billion foot-pounds of force [see - (ht tp://ww w.1728. org/energy.h tm) - note 4 gaps].
There is no way the structure could have survived. You can clearly see that the energy punched though the floor trusses, bypassing the perimeter columns. The energy was fluid, acting like an avalanche.
Thank you for this, I was sitting here thinking that for ever floor that is destroyed, the bottom half of the building then has 1 floor less to suport, so it has to suport less and less weight. Half way down, it would only need to suport half of the weight plus the few blocks on top. Also I were thinking of the whole building full of people. Everyfloor, the extra weight it suports is ridiculas. I bet it could be built much much higher than it is. Thanks I enjoyed the video.
@diegogpb hello yes you are right . these buildings actually fell slower than free fall . watch David chandlers Videos he plotted the acceleration curve,
you second point is that impact exerts bigger forces that the static weight i agree 100% otherwise you would never be able to initiate collapse.
remember that for every action there is an equal. so i assumed at any instant the average resistive force is equal to the weight. i know this model i made is problematic
@shorty40merza I agree, but that force you consider constant isn't, because in the moment of the structural faliure, the resistant force decreases instantaniously to... i don't know, nearly 20-15%, so the average resistance force would be... maby the 30% of the weight?. So accel is positive
anyway, good video, its simple so much people can understand
one thing more, at first i were convinced about no conspirance, now, i doubt, AT THE BEGINING there's free fall, and there are many casualties.
@diegogpb what's more, the upper section has an inclination at the begining of the colapse, but, this inclination didn't change (visibly) to the end of the colapse.
following the physic laws, if there is a force in another direction from the mass knucle (the resistance is in this case), a momentum / torque appears, and here, the inclination doesn't change so, there's no torque, so the resistance is minimal in this aspect...
@diegogpb force is an instantaneous measure. at the start of the collision the top section will exert more force than the static weight because of the inertia .. the force will gradually increase and as it increases the resistive force also increases until they both reach the critical buckling load which is more than the static weight of the top section. This doesn't happen at all times and in other times it yields which means the resistance will be very low... my figure is the average .
@shorty40merza what you mean is (from my point of view) wrong, because you've assumed that there's no safe factor so the 95th floor's maximum resistance is mg from the upper block, that means if each floor has, for example 0.8m of structure and 3m of nothing (except air, you've assumed there's no air). The resistance force before the structural failure of each floor would be mg, the resistance force after that, would be, 10-15% from mg, that means an average froce of about... 25% from mg
@diegogpb no it shows deceleration taking g into account. due to initial speed hence momentum! bcoz of the hight and the deceleration vector being so low,it still collapsed if a was big enough, it would show that building would stop somewhere in mid! make an excel spread sheet formula, and increase the a gradually and see the effect of stop distance! think of a car going down hill or straight at certain speed, if u apply brake light, u ll stop at longer distance, apply break hard u ll stop quick
@diegogpb your point of view is flawed. he is saying the most basic thing and does not take non-linear increase of resistance into account! think of it this way:
u have a car lift ok?it has multiple levels of springs ok? each corresponds to different level of weight hence lift up/down... u have 100 on top 200 in middle 400 at bottom. and each breaks at max load. put say 150kg car weight, u ll know 100kg spring will bend and break, but middle level can resist more weight and can easily absorb it!
@diegogpb also he even ignores safety measures! which bridges and high rises esp use 5 times static load and 3 times dynamic loads.
Also design featuring cage like outer construction which is rigid enough to hold enough weight and soft enough to allow the plane through and absorb its energy,
If it was too rigid, it would stop building getting in, n causing huge Torque/Moment? r x F and break the building at the base or bend the building in the planes movement vector probably with massive stress
@diegogpb One thing i dont think shorty mentioned was the damage area was more than one floor cuz it was at an angle and in the 2nd tower it was off to the right side.(not sure if the first towers damage was centered) For arguments sake lets assume the pancake theory is possible. HAHAHA! When the collapse starts it will never fall straight down, the top floors would have hit and fallen towards the path of least resistance. Therefore no mass to crush or drive the rest of the floors down.
@shorty40merza Everyone interested in 911 go to WhatsReallyGoingOnUS youtube channel to watch "The Toronto Hearings" for the videos of a 4 day live conference of testimony in front of a distinguished citizens grand jury on 911 that took place from 9/8/2011 to 9/11/2011, shorty40merza watch the hearings then spread the word
@shorty40merza Also... Each floor the top encounters is going to be a little more resistance.. it would stop falling instead of going through the whole building. If those burning floors dispersed equally and simultaneously allowing the top floors to fall.. the idea that they would crush the remaining 95 floors and not slow down from free fall is ridiculous. My guess is it would slide off of the top of the remaining lower floors leaving them standing or stopping the telescoping like a table
@diegogpb but the point i was trying to get to is that to crush the lower the upper section will not accelerate but decelerate or have zero acceleration which will mean it takes about 40 seconds for the collapse to continue all the way through
I am also interested in un-biased engineers to discuss this stuff . you can write to me in the private it wil allow more writing space
Now imaging each of the 15 pool balls has a hole through any diameter, pass a piece of steel through each of them, hence connecting them. Then repeat your experiment - your result will be different.
Copy and paste this online (not youtube) and it will take you to a site that gives you real facts about what is going on all over the world, they also have a beheadings section on that site on the right down a little......"This list of the most recent Islamic Terror Attacks around the world in just the last two months is updated on a daily basis. You can see the latest MUSLIM attacks at the link below:"
Don't take our word for anything research and educate yourself everyone!
Do you think after the builds came down the Earth was shaking? Do you thing the buildings in new York are built like they are in LA for Earthquakes..no there not. Building was weird till I researched things and used my brain a little....and yep it's still weirs and I ask questions but we STILL know extremist muslims and osama was involved in all the planes involved that day! That never changes no matter is you say aliens made jews fly ufo's that looked like planes, Jesus did it, thats it! Jesus!
Maybe if bush had a brain he would have waited till obama was in office to do this to his nation what a load of crap, Iraq was not about oil you know how I know this...gas prices would be 50 cents a gallon if it was but there higher than ever, they sure do like not being killed by sadam and ruled by a dictator and being able to vote for who they want don't they! All you need to do is look at my playlist "educate yourself on this" and you see who is killing and blowing shit up all over the world
The US Government expects you to Obey. Believe that a small fire can cause a highrise building to come down at free fall speed into its own footprint. Not once but three time in a row, for the first time in the history of mankind. Believe that Bin Laden planned and executed the whole thing from a cave in afghanistan, perhaps on a laptop. Believe what the media tells you. Believe that the patriot act is to protect you. Believe what your told even if it is absolutely ludicrous. OBEY OBEY OBEY
@newmindinc You said, "The US Government expects you to...believe that a small fire can cause a highrise building to come down ..."
Small fire? What, did someone leave a cigar burning in an ashtray?
Oh wait, maybe you're talking about when the commercial jetliner hit the building with 180,000,000 ft/lbs of force and then its 15,000 gallons of jet fuel exploded into a fireball that set several floors on fire. How come you people never consider that the EXPLOSION might be a factor?
@fascistcat The explosion blew all the fireproofing off the beams they they we're exposed to the heat of the jet fuel burning didn't melt the beams it softened them and soft beams and bolts can't support anything. It is strange how it peeled away like a banana from top to bottom. I read where they found that the builders took shortcuts in building the towers that no one would have known about had this not happened. osama said it was far better than he expected and took credit for it, no doubt.
@fascistcat The jets going fast as they can go full of jet fuel like a commet does stange things to buildings when idiots fly through them for allah and islam. The extremist are not done and never will be but the maker of this video has many good points and I can respect what he is saying. BUT...I know this government would not do this to it's self...why would a president do this on his watch. Jews didn't do it with remote control planes. Muslim extremist did it for allah and islam and revenge!
@MrREAPER2014 More trash, with in between the all 100% certain confident claim "BUT...I know (u don't only believe it, u know it, right?) this govt would not do this to itself"
May I ask, on what basis do u know this?
What do u actually know about the US. Govt.?
Know for a fact that is?
What do u know about all the intelligence agencies, Secret Service, thinktanks etc.?
How well do u know the facts surrounding 9/11, can u state the position of the TM accurately? Go ahead, have a go.
@Sandberg1972 Your not even in the USA and you know everything is that what I am getting. Till someone shows me that the "Jews did with remote control planes" or that Bush did this to himself while he was president with the help of the Jews with remote control planes. When you have proof of that please show me and I will make a youtube channel to tell the world about it. Till then I see muslims or should I say it's the "Extremist muslims" Not the moderate reading the exact same book they are!!!
@Sandberg1972 What do I know...I know my grandfather was in WWII Dad in the CIA and Air force in Pakistan spying on the Russians during the Cold War, Nephew just got back from Iraq. One of my friends was screwing with me and said you know 9/11 relly was an inside job...I said so they pushed this garbage down you till you think it's true too now. He said nope muslims planted explosives for weeks till they we're ready for the big bang. I said now that may have been so!!!
@Sandberg1972 Killing and beheading children even a little muslim girl in Iran and 9 year old in Thailand because there trying to force islamic states..(islamic ghetto hell holes) you know like all over the UK and all of Europe! (islamic ghetto HELL HOLES!) We are not stupid ass swine that can be brainwashed. Sucks don't it, world domination and slaughter of all the infidels (everyone on Earth not muslim) would have been easy with a bunch of idiots to brainwash. We don't make God like buildings!
U're scared about world domination of muslims? Scared of a slaughter of the infidels, meaning ur ass be be wiped off the planet, along with a lot of ur friends?
Wake up dude, there is no slaughter of the infidels, only slaughter of other human beings, for profit and control. Don't kid urself, look around, see what going on, look up the facts, address the hard questions, don't even try 2 pretend 4 one sec that there are no valid Q's 2 ask.
@Sandberg1972 Scared, someone tell me the meaning of the word, defeat, what? Look at the history of what happens when you wake the sleeping beast, 3 men in a foxhole can take out all 1 billion of you swapping out barrels as they melt as one reloads the mags. 3rd man is on a ammo reloader reloading ammo. That is what I'm babbling about. I bet freespiritjustsoul didn't get any answers. I never said there wasn't some strange things but we know extremist flew planes into the buildings man! More ????
@MrREAPER2014 Points: This guy makes no "good points" at all.The only thing that matters is the maximum weight a floor can hold = 'X'. The engineers would allow for '1.5X'. If the floor above falls 12 feet onto it, you have a minimum of 12X + the 1X of the existing floor.
This will pound through and pulverize the thin concrete floor and move right on down. The walls will fly outward from the force of the clips snapping and center columns will fall over if they survive impact.(cont)
U're stating nothing but unproven assumptions, that have never even been tested in reality (u may guess why).
You should listen a bit better to what this guy in the vid has to say, and be a bit more skeptical towards this BS-story u seem to be believing, fed by the US gubmint.
There's no evidence for most of the things that NIST claims, they threw out most of their testresults, because they didn't match their predetermined conclusions.
@Sandberg1972 <<<< this moron can't prove anything and said extremist are not killing anyone I showed him facts that show this is wrong and put it on his channel he removed the truth right away (in seconds) he don't care to know the truth and tries to hide the real facts just like all terrorist do! What did you think of the information I sent you or is it something you are use to. What is wrong you only debate till you see someone knows something?
@MrREAPER2014 What is it about the controlled demolition assumption u do not get? What is it that's so hard to grasp for u?
Same thing the other way around? Do u have any idea what NIST has done regarding their investigation? What tests did they conduct? What did they do with their testresults? Who did they interview and who not? On what basis did they throw out the CD-hypothesis? What evidence do they have that steel skyscrapers can so explosively selfdestruct.
@Sandberg1972 Stated: You said, "U're stating nothing but unproven assumptions..." - I don't care if you want to believe that this was an 'inside job' a 'Jewish plot' or even that Neil Bush was on the 80th floor with an acetylene torch and a case of Budweiser.
My only concern here is the physics of the collapse. The planting of explosives is COMPLETELY unnecessary to your conspiracy theories. Any action that caused the collapse of the 60ft spans would allow it to continue unabated. (cont)
@Sandberg1972 Stated2: Can we at least agree on the design of the building? There was the central core that held 60% of the structure weight, the external columns that held the other 40% and the 60ft span floor trusses that held the weight of each floor.
These trusses were attached one end to the core, the other to the column. These spans did NOT carry the weight of the structure above them. They were like shelves in a bookcase. Rigidity but not support.
@MrREAPER2014 Points2: The center columns were meant to take 60% of the static weight but not lateral forces (sway). You will notice 'The Spire' stood dozens of stories tall because the force went around it.
Once the weight shift happened, there was no force that could stop it. Forget about 'buildings' and look at 'avalanches' to see a similar event.
This guys 'upward force' is silly. A glass table supports weight, but barely slows an object crashing through it.
@fascistcat I know, I was being nice...trying to as hard is it is sometimes. I talk on here with terrorist and wanna be terrorist and people who say there going to take the world and kill all the infidels. So when I see someone who seems to be a "cool muslim" who is trying to make his people not look so bad I try to be nice. I do not like islam at all but I think if the extremist make us be at war with normal every day people just because there muslim the extremist have won! So I was being nice
@fascistcat I would like to see "moderate muslims" stand against the extremist like they do a cortoon or quran burning. Did they ever think if they stood against them as hard as they stand against us when we stand against their own people things would be much better. Truth be told many so called "moderate muslims" support extremist and know it is what it says to do in their holly book. I know many don't but more do every day!
@HurburBurbur I find it funny that some really think this was done by the government. We know muslims hijacked planed we know what they did after we let them into out great nation and taught them how to fly. Our government did go train the extremist's long ago so their dirty hands we're involved that way but we know who did 9/11. I respect why you want to blame Bush and the government but no math will make me believe we build GOD like buildings that can stand anything.
@MrREAPER2014 man you re so innocent and naiv ...typical bred american .... continue beeing a sheep. Since years they've been terrorists and terror attacks (of which I'm sure USA has his fingers on, without doubt) and they didnt manage to do more then bomb away themselves and others and suddenly they capture planes within usa simultaneously and succeed in crashing both WTC ??? man,just think twice and u'll understand that US fashist government is giving you only the stuff they want u to believe
@Arrow3000 lol so there are no extremist terrorist's killing and bombing up shit in the name of islam and allah, there are no extremist's right now training children to grow up to be killers, there are no taliban beheading children even muslim children? Fact is that there are all of those things and more and more everyday. So no I'm not ready to buy the story that aliens we can't see or zionist's we can't see reall did it with remore control planes. Actions of extremist's speak louder than words
@Arrow3000 Ahhaha the country you live you should know what is going on! Yes it's true the USA is not innocent and trained and armed osama, did the US do things that called for an attack from extremist's...YES we asked for it ok! We had it coming long ago and asked for it but so what. We STILL know who did, we know we let them into our country, we taught them how to fly and they blew our ass up! The US government was asking for something like this for a very long time but they did not do it!!!
shorty40,your math and physic teachers should be very disappointed, your model is wrongly developed, just your assumption that human weight affects the building final resistance is just hilarious, not to mention your convention of signs,which doesnt affect the result though
This is a wonderful and simple mathematics should make it very clear to anyone with a basic understanding of physics. This shows that the NIST report is 10000 pages of crap paid for by your tax money. Yet the fail to even address the nature of the collapse. Talk about lack of ambition and honesty.
When the upper floors collapse, they fall on the lower floors crushing them ONE AT A TIME, adding their mass and increasing the acceleration. Ask yourself why NO structural engineers agree with the nonsense you are peddling.
Be carefulle, ( your right in your conclusion ) but you make a mistake in your physical théorie, because you assume that the forces are equal to a constant during all the cruch of the structur and of cours, it's fals.
There are so many ways you can prove that there was a structural failure. The block fell and transferred it's energy to the base of the tower, and there are so many simple tests you can do to prove it if you don't think an energy transfer is "real".
Proof: Line up all 15 pool balls on the side of the pool table, and with the the cue ball, hit the first ball. When it hits, the 15th ball will move forward. Do the same test with the 15th ball backed up in a corner. Notice, everything collapses....
@shorty40merza also force is horizontal and not vertical so cue ball analogy is worthless! building design takes in to account of the horizontal impacts. take into account that very little energy is transferred to the core columns due to the great design of outer cage design! which absorbed majority of the planes impact and re-distributed the weight above to sides. I know it also increased the stress but cage on the impact side still there, and and all other sides nearly intact!
@mysticusa not only cage design but also the floors which were full concrete blocks were there to absorb further energy before plane's kinetic energy is transferred to the core!estimations in the simulations should clearly show this. more to that every agrees fuel fire didnt cause any melt down as it didnt have enough temp or energy to do so even at much longer times! Openair burning temp of jet-a 260-315C n office materials dont burn at higher C. building would bend due to temp but not collapse
@mysticusa what i mean is upper part of building would bend and partially damaged, not burst! and collapse like it did, as steel is not fragile material like plain concrete! or glass! free-fall would only occur if all core collumns were cut like a scissor at once or a perfect uniform concentrated fire over a significant amount of time continually fed! also dont forget fire proof covers and concrete blocks surround them!
but you know if the government and Newton themselves came and said this same truth, people on you tube will STILL deny it!! but never the less brilliant videos and great job on physics!!
Everyone knows the Zionists are behind all of the FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS done in the U.S. The ruthless criminal Gang known as The Bush Family helped of course especially Dubbya and his Zionist Government Thugs such as Wolfowitz, Chertof, etc. The truth is we have no government, except corrupt little idiots at the local levels, only mouthpieces for the Zionists. Obama is our first "actor" president. The U. S. has no real president - only a guy who follows a teleprompter.
Really, how could this be a controlled demolition? You can clearly see that the implosions in both towers were started at the impacted floors. Do you think someone ran up the stairs and planted the explosives after the planes hit? Or do you think explosives were preplanted on every floor, come on... Also, one tower fell after 56 minutes of burning, the other after over 100 minutes of burning. Why wait so long before taking them out? The towers fell because of the damage+fires, WTC 7 is som. else
If they had blown it right away it would'nt have been the media event that it was. Now you had full coverage and a schock effect also for the viewers becoming the most dramatic reality show ever to be created. Dick Cheney is an evil genius to quote anti terrorist advisor Richard Clarke though in another context.
@sskinner99 No chance he's a sophomore in mechanical engineering. I say that because a mechanical engineer wouldn't use constant acceleration laws, nor would he have erred on his FBD. At the very least a limit state analysis of the perimeter and core columns for rupture is needed. Column's can rupture quite easily if forces are misaligned from the centroid, leaving not much to support all that mass. The building failed from bending, not normal stresses due to mass being dropped on it.
This is brilliant, even using the most optimistic calculations it makes no sense. Even someone (probably not as educated) like me can understand that the top block met feck all resistance on the way down even tho the bottom part of the tower including the supporting core, 42 supporting columns!! (undamaged, supposedly) was in the way???? And it fell in 10 seconds!!!!
3. Your calculations do not account for widely differing resistance factors WITHIN the structure itself (i.e. floor joints vs. trusses vs. central core, etc.) and therefore does not present a viable model for what happened. 4. Your initial calculation was for the upper x floors falling only a single floor (3.8 meters). In both cases the planes hit at angles knocking out portions of several floors, not a single floor. In the end you do not come near proving the case against structural failure.
Ridiculous! Your calculations make many wrong assumptions: 1. That a single mass (the upper x floors) fell on another "mass" with opposing "force". In fact, the falling mass was cumulative and increased with each successive floor collapse. 2. The increasing cumulative mass was in fact gaining momentum (not losing as you hypothesize) since each successive floor collapse started with a greater initial velocity. (continued)
great video, i cant understand why its still a debate, its so obvious it was a controlled demolition. Either that or that building was designed to fall apart. The force of the top floors falling probably wouldnt even equal to the top floors fully loaded. I wanna know what the maximum weight handling was for each floor. Somebody find out and add that up to see and compare it to the load that day.
To do it a bit more properly you should take in account kinetic energy, too. At a rough estimate the collapse time would be half of the time you calculated. But nevertheless it will disprove the official version with the free fall speed.
More importantly, this is a scaling issue, which truthers don't seem to be very good at. For example, weight is proportional to volume but strength is proportional to cross-sectional area (this is called the square/cube rule).
More importantly, this is a scaling issue, which truthers don't seem to be very good at. For example, weight is proportional to volume but strength is proportional to cross-sectional area (this is called the square/cube rule).
And there is something deniers often forget. There are always security factors calculated in every construction, the more life is depending on it, usually the higher the security factors. Even if a third of the structure would disappear and the other two thirds would be weakened by 50% the building wouldn't collapse in this manner. Period.
I agree with the scaling factor.
But you also have to think of it as a NON-RIGID body and loss of significant material mass during collapse.
Now you have seen all three parts always remember The weight of steel vs. concrete is important. Near the Earth's surface, gravitational potential energy is defined as weight times height. A piece of steel that falls from some given height will have 3x the kinetic energy as an identically sized piece of concrete falling from the same height (because steel is roughly 3x denser than concrete). Therefore, the steel piece is potentially 3x as destructive as the concrete piece when it hits.
Hello, Please excuse my ignorance, I am not an engineer of any type. I have found your videos very informative and appreciate very much that you shared them with us. Knowledge is the true power :) I may be missing this; but how did you take into account the cumulative additional mass of each collapsing floor? Wouldn't the additional mass cause acceleration? Thank you in advance for addressing my question-and plese accept my apologies if I have missed your explaniation of this variable.
@freespiritjustsoul Mass has nothing to do with acceleration when gravity is involved....If you drop a small apple and a big apple at the same time....They will hit the ground at the same time
its so soo sooo ironic that something that is so obviously sinister, something so obvious as the way the buildings fell on 9/11, that we need ppl to go through 3 videos and useing all this mathematics just to prove wat was so obvious, im sorry to say this america but u r indeed fucked,anyway really well done videos
@borgoat21 I said Tonnes , you might have mistaken that with pounds because they sound similar. i only use Tonnes and kilograms in consistence with the formulas.
One thing you didn't considered was the fact that in the moment of the colision the downward force isn't equal to the weight of the top part of the building.
You have to considerer the momentum and the impulse cause the force of something that's falling is always higher than its weight.
Even this "extra" force I believe still lower than the structural resistance.
I don't believe the official story and am trying to understand these calculations so that I can raise them with my stubborn engineer uncle. In these calculations we assumed a constant upward resistance force; wouldn't the upward resistance decrease for a time at each floor once it's structural integrity had been compromised?
@peaceviddie hi sir , yes we assumed the upward resistance force is constant which is not accurate because the resistance in a dynamic situation would vary at any given instance. this method is not conventional to calculate dynamic situations but i can bet that if you calculate the energetics it will not give you a time shorter than what i got. the proper way is by computing the energetics. or i refer you to a video watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ
@shorty40merza Wow what a video. But I fail to see the point in it. at what point have you accounted for the building design and tilt of top section. Kids with no brains actually think this video is proof of a Controlled demolition? This video is ruining peoples lives its making them believe conspiracy nonsense which in turn makes them look stupid.
@TheLHOser there are hundreds of videos to prove that the attack was an inside job lol.people like you even after seeing the truth will say conspiracy theory.I say Govt: made conspiracy to collapse the building and Critical thinkers made Theory to prove that it was an inside job and there is nothing wrong lolIt should be so..and American people do deserve to know the truth. know thousands of Architectures and physicists say it is surely an inside job with scientific proof. u leave this one lol
@jery61007 know thousands of Architectures and physicists. HA HA HA
I know millions of structural engineers world demo experts that say your wrong these people are in the the correct field to comment "Architectures" lol "hundreds of videos to prove that the attack was an inside " And it takes only a hand full of videos to prove them wrong.
PS is one of the hundreds of videos this one because it is wrong so badly. Maths and formulas are correct but meaningless as usual in truth vids.
@TheLHOser can you please show me one Video that prove it was not an inside Job lol u can only show me some official claims and nothing else.. is it fair to believe that an area that is highly secured with all the new technology overtaken by Terrorists.one of the interesting Americans sophisticated radar system can't even find the flight.it is really absurd to believe so.Politicians are not the way you think lol they have their own corporate and Zionist agenda and they will do anything for that
@jery61007 "can you please show me one Video that prove it was not an inside Job lol u can only show me some official claims and nothing else." Wrong again but your level of research on this is useless. That is to say your thick.
"even after seeing the truth will say conspiracy theory" Really what truth is this! every truther video lies in some way making its points invalid even this video is wrong. but when you grow up you will see this HA HA HA HA
@TheLHOser"hundreds of videos to prove that the attack was an inside And it takes only a hand full of videos to prove them wrong." above is ur comment, then prove with your handful of Videos that those are incorrect..I don't think all video are true but many of them explains reasons why it is said it was an inside Job and the reasons are provable with scientific and eyewitness or survivors.many survivors have already claimed they heard explosion inside WTC many times
@jery61007 BBC conspiracy files. these videos explain all and disprove everything from the likes of A&E and many others. you claim science as proof but have been fooled again plz read the RJ LEE report.
" .many survivors have already claimed they heard explosion inside WTC many times" oh please not this one its been explained many times as to what these noises were. sounds like explosions is what many of these eyewitnesses meant.
@peaceviddie calculation of the acceleration of wtc 7 collapse, (height/distance) d = 174m (time for collapse) t = 6.5s d = Va X t (Va is Average Velocity) Va = d / t Va = 174 / 6.5 Va=26.7 V1 (intitial velocity) = 0 Va = Vf+V1 / 2 (Vf is final velocity) Va X 2 = Vf+V1 26.7 X 2 = Vf+0 Vf = 53.5 ^V (change in velocity) = Vf-V1 ^V = 53.5 - 0 ^V = 53.5m/s ^V = a X t 53.5 = a x 6.5s a = 53.5/6.5 a = 8.2 m/s/s for wtc building 7 "a" in a vacuum at freefall with zero resistance is 9.8m/s/s
Excellant vid, very competant rough calculation & good review of extenuating conditions ie. decreased mass of falling 'block' due to expansion of disintegrating debris countered by increasing resistance of lower support structure.
This result of t = 42 (44) seconds is very close to the 45 seconds I saw several years ago in a graph-plotted calculation. It confirms the basic understanding of conservation of momentum, a 361 m skyscraper CANNOT disintegrate thru itself in 10 to 15 sec.
@BonFire110 -- The scientifically-derived conclusion reached here does not invariably lead to your premise. It is evidence that directly contradicts the official explanation of towers' collapse. Perhaps that is why many people refuse to look at the evidence of official fraud objectively, they cannot bear accepting a sole conclusion they assume is the only one, ie. the whole CIA/Pentagon institutions must be involved. Truthseeking requires following evidence wherever it leads, cost irregardless.
Even if the physics were not provided, it is obvious that the building was subject to demolition. It fell at the rate of gravity. In addition, what about the words of Silverstein to "PULL" building 7? A pull job does not happen in a couple of hours. It takes weeks of planning. This whole fiasco was a means by which the United States government could go to war. My view on the war on terror is that the United States terrorizes their own. Sad is what it is.
So buildings are big solid lumps of metal, with no air or space within? Contrary to popular belief, the world trade center did not have the material density of a tree. If the science behind this logic he uses were sound, axes would not be able to cut down trees, and there would be no difference between a dum dum bullet and a regular bullet. In carcrashes only one car would be damaged, since the one travelling slowest would have to be rigged with explosives, for it to take any damage
@DonArsuk84 Horrible, horrible comment here. Absolutely irrelevant to the subject matter. Basically every point you posted is debunked by high school physics. Sorry dude!
@LeBron23JamesFan the sides of the towers collapsed inward and the top part fell over it causing it to collapse Really?? in all the footage I've seen, the sides seem to go outward...
Example why we as Americans are doomed.First video gets 96k hits and lowers to 9k.Guitar hero generation zombies have the attention span of a knat.I wonder if thell have xbox in my Fema camp?
This goes on and on. For each floor, you can assune that the columns can buckle elastically at most by 10% of their length before they fail. Do math correctly and you will find that the downward acceleration (90%) distance) outpaces the resistance 10% of the distance), even if you allow for a safety factor of 3 times the static load, and a total average of about 2/3 g must be expected. This fits very well with the observed duration of the collapse.
There is an obvious flaw in your model, shorty40merza: When the top block travels down at 8.63m/s, at initial contact with the lower block it gets decelerated, true. But it keeps going down, straining and then buckling and breaking the columns below. This will happen after a short distance. Once columns break, they offer no resistance, and the top block (now enlarged by additional failing floors) will be accelerated by gravity (g) again.
The columns did not melt, they were softened by the heat of the fire. Most of the fire proofing was blown off by the impact of the plane. So the steel had no protection from the heat of the fire.
Why are you calculating the bottom floors accelerating up? Your theory is flawed, thinking that the lower floors would stop the upper collapsing floors because they have supported them for 30 years.
The lower part of the tower is stronger to support the vertical load of the building.
@lonegull Steel dose not melt until you reach temp of 3000 degrees. Most of the fuel from the plane would have been used up in the first explosion, also steel used in builds like the WTC would be high grade steel that can hold more than 3000 degrees....lonegull dose it really make sense to you that a small section of the top would cause the building to come down in 10sec?????? use your fuking head...dam
Your argument is that the lower 95 floors should support the falling 15 floors above it? Have you heard of load stress, vertical load distribution. The floors were designed to handle only a specific amount of load, not infinite amount. The upper 15 floors falling on to the lower floors would have over loaded those floors, causing them to fail and they would cause the floors below to fail...etc.
From your arguments it is natural to argue that 10 seconds --- the actual time it took for the whole tower to reach the ground --- equates the free fall speed. Free fall speed occurs only when an object (in our case the top part of the tower) is let falling in empty space. And the only way to obtain empty space below the block and achieve free fall speed is to remove (i.e. destroy) what is standing below.
merza, you have done an excellent explanation. 44 seconds is ~ 6 times slower than what hapenned. I think gravity there was a gravitational force shift that day accelerate the freefall. Thunbs Up
The drop was 15 and 22 seconds, many videos of the collapse shows this, just take a stopwatch and measure it yourself. Don't confuse the rubble at free fall with the actual structure. The rubble is obscuring the structure that is still collapsing.
Something wrong in the calculations, he is forgetting that the structural break moves down and the mass above the breaks becomes bigger and bigger.
@nassimj or explosive decompression caused by demolition :) think about it, why do demolition teams wire buildings so that the collapse INWARD when the charges go off ?
I am very happy to see the vidoe The mathematical formulas used here are not the proper way for obtaining a real figure but they are based on assumptions in order to obtain after you give this
Kricardose 2 weeks ago
I Love The Video It Can Increase My Knowledge The mathematical formulas used here are not the proper way for obtaining a real figure but they are based on assumptions
bebeheuy 2 weeks ago
Steady I Really Like This Video The mathematical formulas used here are not the proper way for obtaining a real figure but they are based on assumptions in order to obtain a value fore the absolute minimum time needed for the collapse process.
Mjhond 2 weeks ago
you all say muslims are killers do you meen when the us army killed more then
20000 men women and children in Iraq or when thay killed more then 50000
in Afghanistan or that the us have a military base in In all the Araben countries
or that ben ladn in fact was created by the us government to fight Russia
so you are saying that the us can kill ass mach as thay want and thay are rite
but if someone that work for them kills then the muslims did it is that fare
fastTOtheHart 2 months ago
Maybe bin Laden had some magic potion or a gift from Allah that could defy Newton's Law?
anastasia2657 3 months ago
I have a 9/11 playlist that explains a little but still there are weird things about 9/11. Weird things happen when huge jets fly through the center of a building fast as they can go full of fuel like a commet right through main beams, blasting off the fireproofing from the rest of the beams and soften the beams and bolts. An avalanche goes faster as more mass pushes down but that is snow.
MrREAPER2014 3 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 The fires were mostly burned out by the time of the collapse. The jet fuel that spilled down the elevator shafts burned out in minutes. Otherwise the firemen could not have ridden the elevators as far as they did.
Skeptic121 2 months ago
@Skeptic121 Sorry man but I just don't buy the 9/11 inside job story at all. If one day there is real proof showing that someone other than extremist muslims did it in the name of alah and islam, the same extremist that behead children in Thailand trying to force an islamic state, the same extremist that are killing people even their own muslim women and children. I know there are good and bad people in every race and every nation. I also know it says to lie to us infidels to "try" to dominate
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@Skeptic121 There was fuel exploding in the shafts up till the last people ran out, the police saw the towers leaning and swaying a bit before they fell and they knew it would fall. I will eat shit if they show me proof that someone other than the same extremist muslims who are kiling thousands all over the world. It's like saying our buildings are God like and should still be standing even if the world exploded, a building has never fell like that cuz we never had jets go through them before...
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@Skeptic121 look at the playlist 9/11 FACTS, of course this does not explain everything and there are strange things about it. We still know extremist muslims we taught to fly and let come to our free nation flew into buildings, was it an inside job, hell yeah it was MUSLIMS INSIDE AMERICA KILLING AMERICANS! If there was something planted there in the buildings guess what, their muslim friends planted it there for months before the attack, we have people from the mideast working here you know?
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@Skeptic121 Boy will feel stupid if they ever show me proof that santa or some alien or the cia....maybe santa, bush and the zionist's I have never seen one of those before but maybe they did it. Till I see proof I know who did it...in fact well after 9/11 there was a mosque not long ago in south Florida sending at least $53,000 to the taliban in pakistan. Why do you NEVER see "moserate muslims" working so hard to fight their own extremist people, there either fighting the infidel or some bs...
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 No one denies that Muslims flew the planes into the towers. You are bashing a straw man.
Skeptic121 2 months ago
@Skeptic121 A straw man lol...
No I'm making a point...so if you and I both know the fact that they flew into buildings what do you think the cia, bush or some zionist blew the building up from the inside just so that the already "islamic extremist muslims" terror job was even bigger than even they expected it to be...
It's like saying we know the USA dropped the bomb on Japan but a group who don't want people to think that says some of santa's helpers did it instead...just don't make sense!
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 You can't ANSWER the real question raised by the video, so you beat on something else. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe you CAN answer the real question. If so, DO it. Otherwise, just make yourself feel better by spewing insults.
Skeptic121 2 months ago
@Skeptic121 If the word santa is an insult then.ok whatever, I have told the guy who made this video I respect his views and he makes plenty of sense but there are of course many questions still. I've worked in the buildings before like that and I know it's nothing but nuts and bolts with fireproofing. Not made to have a huge jet fly throgh full of fuel as fast as it can go. No the insult is my American people getting felt up at air ports like there terrorist,granny and 5 year old grand daughter
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 dear sir, you were too good to tell the guy who made this video that you respect his extremely non-expert meaningless equations spewing views. this whole video should have been a SNL skit. an obvious layman pretending to lecture on complex physical phenomenon. a real physicist knows they can't make accurate predictions even for simplest experiments, let alone an unimaginably complex physical phenomenon such as happened on 911. this guy is full of hot air and insulting to boot
JamesIsViolet 2 months ago in playlist More videos from shorty40merza
@Skeptic121 the only insult here is this video itself - this is the kind of proof that you truthers tout? OMG you guys are even more pathetic than i thought.
JamesIsViolet 2 months ago in playlist More videos from shorty40merza
@JamesIsViolet All anyone needs to do is ask any nation on Earth where Muslims reach just 3-5% of that nation and ask them who is blowing up shit, beheading children, ftrying to force islamic states in their nation and killing to get it done. Ask any of the nations in my playlist "Educate yourself on this" who is doing all the terror and killing. Then try to tell them santa did it or they did it to themself and you will be hung I bet! Are there good Muslims...of course there is, there are many!
MrREAPER2014 2 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 yes sir! and quite simply, despite this mumbling idiot living in some severely simplified pseudo-physics-derived- half baked equation blathering driven parallel universe, there is zero evidence that 911 was an inside job
JamesIsViolet 2 months ago
@JamesIsViolet Hello Violet: somebody is having a hissy-fit over a YouTube video and not making gay men look very mainstream.
Skeptic121 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Skeptic121 i know u want me loverboy ;-)
JamesIsViolet 2 months ago
@6:15 - 6:35
YES! thats just what proves it for me! something must have weakened the inner core, otherwise we would have had the core still standing.
all those formulas are blabla to me, im not a mathematical genius, but you explain it for me so i can understand it!
thanks!
RockahD91 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sarcasm is the effort of a bored mind at wit. Never mind what the internet and everyone else is claiming. Just look at the video above and tell me what do you think caused that building to fall down so perfectly vertically inside 6.5 seconds (basically at free fall speed)'
The videos above are not "internet rumors" or "conspiracy theories", they are taken from the TV networks on that day.
What do you think caused that building to collapse?
Fire?
Seigu007 4 months ago
I appreciate these calculations. Best case scenario is it assumes this block is intact the whole time it's destroying the building and videos show it certainly is not. What is the driving force destroying the structure underneath if the mass of the top portion is being destroyed itself. How can these two destroy each other anyway? Wouldn't the top be intact until it encounters the resistance of hitting the ground?
AlwaysSomething 4 months ago
Asuming the columns were melted by fire, would the columns have been heated enough a few stories down the to reduce the amount of resistance offered? Also weren't the clumns desined to be supported by horizontal plates whick would cause them to fail vertically as center plates were dropping on top of eachother?
MrStiphenson 4 months ago
only thing i know about physics is each action has an equal & opposite reaction. so if the weight and inertia of the top piece is enough to collapse the floors of the bottom piece wouldnt it also be enough to collapse the floors of the top piece? which means the collapse would eventually come to a stop since there r less floors on the top piece than the bottom piece? i asked this B4 i saw this video and im a HS drop out. im wondering why there are so many people arent asking the same thing
timjitsu714 4 months ago
If we accept your 68,000 tons for the upper 15 floors, and then drop this mass 12 feet onto the supporting structure, it will hit with 1.6 Billion foot-pounds of force [see - (ht tp://ww w.1728. org/energy.h tm) - note 4 gaps].
There is no way the structure could have survived. You can clearly see that the energy punched though the floor trusses, bypassing the perimeter columns. The energy was fluid, acting like an avalanche.
fascistcat 4 months ago
@fascistcat "1.6 Billion foot-pounds of force" - this is a unit for mass not for force
number367 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@number367 You said, " "1.6 Billion foot-pounds of force" - this is a unit for mass not for force "
What are you talking about? I provided a link so that you could figure it out for yourself.
Try Google: 1) "foot pound of force" = 65,000 results. 2) "foot pounds of mass" = 2 results
I find 'Truthers' know little of the construction of The Towers, materials of the aircraft, physics, aerodynamics or most any other subject.
I know, I know.. I'm 'brainwashed!!'
fascistcat 3 months ago
your videos are great and awesome physics but you should have not overlapped one video other the other.
bot06 4 months ago in playlist More videos from shorty40merza
what is failed to be mentioned is that if there is a progressive structural collapse
then the weakest links(ie horizontal trusses and beams) would have sheared off
but the vertical members (columns and inner core) should have at least offered
MASSIVE RESISTANCE to a least cause minimum deceleration of even at best towards the last 20 floors a complete deceleration of the sturcture
THIS IS A COMPLETE DEMOLITION
NO WAY OUT OF IT
rossp3313 4 months ago
Thank you for this, I was sitting here thinking that for ever floor that is destroyed, the bottom half of the building then has 1 floor less to suport, so it has to suport less and less weight. Half way down, it would only need to suport half of the weight plus the few blocks on top. Also I were thinking of the whole building full of people. Everyfloor, the extra weight it suports is ridiculas. I bet it could be built much much higher than it is. Thanks I enjoyed the video.
benjyboba 4 months ago
I think this three videos made clear for me about the so called theories. I agree with you with some of the points, Keep up the good work, man.
movienaut 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
correction* it would stop building getting in >>it would stop plane getting in...
think of it like boxer training ball, u hit it, it moves back and bounces forward.
mysticusa 4 months ago
I think free fall is impossible having any type of structure behind you, BUT there's an important issue you aren´t incluiding in the calculation.
The higher block weights X, the impact with the block behind it at 8.63m/s is much stronger than X.
it depends on the deformation of the floor down it. I mean, the summation of forces goes down, so, the accel (following your axis) is possitive.
im studying engeneering and i wonder if free fall in this case is possible, can anyone confirm that?
diegogpb 4 months ago
@diegogpb hello yes you are right . these buildings actually fell slower than free fall . watch David chandlers Videos he plotted the acceleration curve,
you second point is that impact exerts bigger forces that the static weight i agree 100% otherwise you would never be able to initiate collapse.
remember that for every action there is an equal. so i assumed at any instant the average resistive force is equal to the weight. i know this model i made is problematic
shorty40merza 4 months ago
@shorty40merza I agree, but that force you consider constant isn't, because in the moment of the structural faliure, the resistant force decreases instantaniously to... i don't know, nearly 20-15%, so the average resistance force would be... maby the 30% of the weight?. So accel is positive
anyway, good video, its simple so much people can understand
one thing more, at first i were convinced about no conspirance, now, i doubt, AT THE BEGINING there's free fall, and there are many casualties.
diegogpb 4 months ago
@diegogpb what's more, the upper section has an inclination at the begining of the colapse, but, this inclination didn't change (visibly) to the end of the colapse.
following the physic laws, if there is a force in another direction from the mass knucle (the resistance is in this case), a momentum / torque appears, and here, the inclination doesn't change so, there's no torque, so the resistance is minimal in this aspect...
I doubt about official-conspirancy theory XD
diegogpb 4 months ago
@diegogpb force is an instantaneous measure. at the start of the collision the top section will exert more force than the static weight because of the inertia .. the force will gradually increase and as it increases the resistive force also increases until they both reach the critical buckling load which is more than the static weight of the top section. This doesn't happen at all times and in other times it yields which means the resistance will be very low... my figure is the average .
shorty40merza 4 months ago
@shorty40merza what you mean is (from my point of view) wrong, because you've assumed that there's no safe factor so the 95th floor's maximum resistance is mg from the upper block, that means if each floor has, for example 0.8m of structure and 3m of nothing (except air, you've assumed there's no air). The resistance force before the structural failure of each floor would be mg, the resistance force after that, would be, 10-15% from mg, that means an average froce of about... 25% from mg
diegogpb 4 months ago
@diegogpb so, total force is mg going down and 0.25mg going up, it accelerates down at about 75% from g
diegogpb 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@diegogpb no it shows deceleration taking g into account. due to initial speed hence momentum! bcoz of the hight and the deceleration vector being so low,it still collapsed if a was big enough, it would show that building would stop somewhere in mid! make an excel spread sheet formula, and increase the a gradually and see the effect of stop distance! think of a car going down hill or straight at certain speed, if u apply brake light, u ll stop at longer distance, apply break hard u ll stop quick
mysticusa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@diegogpb u can have +V but -a which shows slowing down (going back or forth depending on your reference point)
mysticusa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@diegogpb your point of view is flawed. he is saying the most basic thing and does not take non-linear increase of resistance into account! think of it this way:
u have a car lift ok?it has multiple levels of springs ok? each corresponds to different level of weight hence lift up/down... u have 100 on top 200 in middle 400 at bottom. and each breaks at max load. put say 150kg car weight, u ll know 100kg spring will bend and break, but middle level can resist more weight and can easily absorb it!
mysticusa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@diegogpb also he even ignores safety measures! which bridges and high rises esp use 5 times static load and 3 times dynamic loads.
Also design featuring cage like outer construction which is rigid enough to hold enough weight and soft enough to allow the plane through and absorb its energy,
If it was too rigid, it would stop building getting in, n causing huge Torque/Moment? r x F and break the building at the base or bend the building in the planes movement vector probably with massive stress
mysticusa 4 months ago
@diegogpb One thing i dont think shorty mentioned was the damage area was more than one floor cuz it was at an angle and in the 2nd tower it was off to the right side.(not sure if the first towers damage was centered) For arguments sake lets assume the pancake theory is possible. HAHAHA! When the collapse starts it will never fall straight down, the top floors would have hit and fallen towards the path of least resistance. Therefore no mass to crush or drive the rest of the floors down.
rammer561 4 months ago
@shorty40merza Everyone interested in 911 go to WhatsReallyGoingOnUS youtube channel to watch "The Toronto Hearings" for the videos of a 4 day live conference of testimony in front of a distinguished citizens grand jury on 911 that took place from 9/8/2011 to 9/11/2011, shorty40merza watch the hearings then spread the word
rammer561 4 months ago
@shorty40merza Also... Each floor the top encounters is going to be a little more resistance.. it would stop falling instead of going through the whole building. If those burning floors dispersed equally and simultaneously allowing the top floors to fall.. the idea that they would crush the remaining 95 floors and not slow down from free fall is ridiculous. My guess is it would slide off of the top of the remaining lower floors leaving them standing or stopping the telescoping like a table
Sparksis 4 months ago in playlist More videos from shorty40merza
@diegogpb but the point i was trying to get to is that to crush the lower the upper section will not accelerate but decelerate or have zero acceleration which will mean it takes about 40 seconds for the collapse to continue all the way through
I am also interested in un-biased engineers to discuss this stuff . you can write to me in the private it wil allow more writing space
shorty40merza 4 months ago
@shorty40merza I proofed ur calculation. Didnt find a mistake.
One thing we dont know is: How much bigger was the force opposite the wight.
But good and easy idea.
number367 3 months ago
Comment removed
diegogpb 4 months ago
Comment removed
diegogpb 4 months ago
@unleeshed
Now imaging each of the 15 pool balls has a hole through any diameter, pass a piece of steel through each of them, hence connecting them. Then repeat your experiment - your result will be different.
LosAHills 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Copy and paste this online (not youtube) and it will take you to a site that gives you real facts about what is going on all over the world, they also have a beheadings section on that site on the right down a little......"This list of the most recent Islamic Terror Attacks around the world in just the last two months is updated on a daily basis. You can see the latest MUSLIM attacks at the link below:"
Don't take our word for anything research and educate yourself everyone!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
Do you think after the builds came down the Earth was shaking? Do you thing the buildings in new York are built like they are in LA for Earthquakes..no there not. Building was weird till I researched things and used my brain a little....and yep it's still weirs and I ask questions but we STILL know extremist muslims and osama was involved in all the planes involved that day! That never changes no matter is you say aliens made jews fly ufo's that looked like planes, Jesus did it, thats it! Jesus!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
Maybe if bush had a brain he would have waited till obama was in office to do this to his nation what a load of crap, Iraq was not about oil you know how I know this...gas prices would be 50 cents a gallon if it was but there higher than ever, they sure do like not being killed by sadam and ruled by a dictator and being able to vote for who they want don't they! All you need to do is look at my playlist "educate yourself on this" and you see who is killing and blowing shit up all over the world
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Look at my playlist's!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
The US Government expects you to Obey. Believe that a small fire can cause a highrise building to come down at free fall speed into its own footprint. Not once but three time in a row, for the first time in the history of mankind. Believe that Bin Laden planned and executed the whole thing from a cave in afghanistan, perhaps on a laptop. Believe what the media tells you. Believe that the patriot act is to protect you. Believe what your told even if it is absolutely ludicrous. OBEY OBEY OBEY
newmindinc 5 months ago
@newmindinc You said, "The US Government expects you to...believe that a small fire can cause a highrise building to come down ..."
Small fire? What, did someone leave a cigar burning in an ashtray?
Oh wait, maybe you're talking about when the commercial jetliner hit the building with 180,000,000 ft/lbs of force and then its 15,000 gallons of jet fuel exploded into a fireball that set several floors on fire. How come you people never consider that the EXPLOSION might be a factor?
fascistcat 4 months ago in playlist More videos from shorty40merza
@fascistcat The explosion blew all the fireproofing off the beams they they we're exposed to the heat of the jet fuel burning didn't melt the beams it softened them and soft beams and bolts can't support anything. It is strange how it peeled away like a banana from top to bottom. I read where they found that the builders took shortcuts in building the towers that no one would have known about had this not happened. osama said it was far better than he expected and took credit for it, no doubt.
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@fascistcat The jets going fast as they can go full of jet fuel like a commet does stange things to buildings when idiots fly through them for allah and islam. The extremist are not done and never will be but the maker of this video has many good points and I can respect what he is saying. BUT...I know this government would not do this to it's self...why would a president do this on his watch. Jews didn't do it with remote control planes. Muslim extremist did it for allah and islam and revenge!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 More trash, with in between the all 100% certain confident claim "BUT...I know (u don't only believe it, u know it, right?) this govt would not do this to itself"
May I ask, on what basis do u know this?
What do u actually know about the US. Govt.?
Know for a fact that is?
What do u know about all the intelligence agencies, Secret Service, thinktanks etc.?
How well do u know the facts surrounding 9/11, can u state the position of the TM accurately? Go ahead, have a go.
Sandberg1972 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 Your not even in the USA and you know everything is that what I am getting. Till someone shows me that the "Jews did with remote control planes" or that Bush did this to himself while he was president with the help of the Jews with remote control planes. When you have proof of that please show me and I will make a youtube channel to tell the world about it. Till then I see muslims or should I say it's the "Extremist muslims" Not the moderate reading the exact same book they are!!!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 What do I know...I know my grandfather was in WWII Dad in the CIA and Air force in Pakistan spying on the Russians during the Cold War, Nephew just got back from Iraq. One of my friends was screwing with me and said you know 9/11 relly was an inside job...I said so they pushed this garbage down you till you think it's true too now. He said nope muslims planted explosives for weeks till they we're ready for the big bang. I said now that may have been so!!!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 Killing and beheading children even a little muslim girl in Iran and 9 year old in Thailand because there trying to force islamic states..(islamic ghetto hell holes) you know like all over the UK and all of Europe! (islamic ghetto HELL HOLES!) We are not stupid ass swine that can be brainwashed. Sucks don't it, world domination and slaughter of all the infidels (everyone on Earth not muslim) would have been easy with a bunch of idiots to brainwash. We don't make God like buildings!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 Dude the hell are u babbling about?
U're scared about world domination of muslims? Scared of a slaughter of the infidels, meaning ur ass be be wiped off the planet, along with a lot of ur friends?
Wake up dude, there is no slaughter of the infidels, only slaughter of other human beings, for profit and control. Don't kid urself, look around, see what going on, look up the facts, address the hard questions, don't even try 2 pretend 4 one sec that there are no valid Q's 2 ask.
Sandberg1972 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 Scared, someone tell me the meaning of the word, defeat, what? Look at the history of what happens when you wake the sleeping beast, 3 men in a foxhole can take out all 1 billion of you swapping out barrels as they melt as one reloads the mags. 3rd man is on a ammo reloader reloading ammo. That is what I'm babbling about. I bet freespiritjustsoul didn't get any answers. I never said there wasn't some strange things but we know extremist flew planes into the buildings man! More ????
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 Points: This guy makes no "good points" at all.The only thing that matters is the maximum weight a floor can hold = 'X'. The engineers would allow for '1.5X'. If the floor above falls 12 feet onto it, you have a minimum of 12X + the 1X of the existing floor.
This will pound through and pulverize the thin concrete floor and move right on down. The walls will fly outward from the force of the clips snapping and center columns will fall over if they survive impact.(cont)
fascistcat 4 months ago
@fascistcat Can u make up anymore shit than this?
U're stating nothing but unproven assumptions, that have never even been tested in reality (u may guess why).
You should listen a bit better to what this guy in the vid has to say, and be a bit more skeptical towards this BS-story u seem to be believing, fed by the US gubmint.
There's no evidence for most of the things that NIST claims, they threw out most of their testresults, because they didn't match their predetermined conclusions.
Sandberg1972 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 <<<< this moron can't prove anything and said extremist are not killing anyone I showed him facts that show this is wrong and put it on his channel he removed the truth right away (in seconds) he don't care to know the truth and tries to hide the real facts just like all terrorist do! What did you think of the information I sent you or is it something you are use to. What is wrong you only debate till you see someone knows something?
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 What is it about the controlled demolition assumption u do not get? What is it that's so hard to grasp for u?
Same thing the other way around? Do u have any idea what NIST has done regarding their investigation? What tests did they conduct? What did they do with their testresults? Who did they interview and who not? On what basis did they throw out the CD-hypothesis? What evidence do they have that steel skyscrapers can so explosively selfdestruct.
Lemme tell you....NONE
Sandberg1972 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 Stated: You said, "U're stating nothing but unproven assumptions..." - I don't care if you want to believe that this was an 'inside job' a 'Jewish plot' or even that Neil Bush was on the 80th floor with an acetylene torch and a case of Budweiser.
My only concern here is the physics of the collapse. The planting of explosives is COMPLETELY unnecessary to your conspiracy theories. Any action that caused the collapse of the 60ft spans would allow it to continue unabated. (cont)
fascistcat 4 months ago
@Sandberg1972 Stated2: Can we at least agree on the design of the building? There was the central core that held 60% of the structure weight, the external columns that held the other 40% and the 60ft span floor trusses that held the weight of each floor.
These trusses were attached one end to the core, the other to the column. These spans did NOT carry the weight of the structure above them. They were like shelves in a bookcase. Rigidity but not support.
Are we in agreement, so far ?
fascistcat 4 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 Points2: The center columns were meant to take 60% of the static weight but not lateral forces (sway). You will notice 'The Spire' stood dozens of stories tall because the force went around it.
Once the weight shift happened, there was no force that could stop it. Forget about 'buildings' and look at 'avalanches' to see a similar event.
This guys 'upward force' is silly. A glass table supports weight, but barely slows an object crashing through it.
fascistcat 4 months ago
@fascistcat I know, I was being nice...trying to as hard is it is sometimes. I talk on here with terrorist and wanna be terrorist and people who say there going to take the world and kill all the infidels. So when I see someone who seems to be a "cool muslim" who is trying to make his people not look so bad I try to be nice. I do not like islam at all but I think if the extremist make us be at war with normal every day people just because there muslim the extremist have won! So I was being nice
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@fascistcat I would like to see "moderate muslims" stand against the extremist like they do a cortoon or quran burning. Did they ever think if they stood against them as hard as they stand against us when we stand against their own people things would be much better. Truth be told many so called "moderate muslims" support extremist and know it is what it says to do in their holly book. I know many don't but more do every day!
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
@fascistcat What's with the glass table? What a nice example? Why not a paper table, right? Or can u think of something more weak?
How'bout a steel table? If u can't even grasp the concept of up- and downward acting forces, then what the fuck are u doing here?
The dude from this vid does a pretty good job, go ahead if u can debunk his arguments with some solid ones of ur own.
So leave out phrases like "because the force & I quote "went around it"", to avoid severe ridicule.
Sandberg1972 4 months ago
@MrREAPER2014
...and goverment extremists did it for power and money.
They were both guilty.
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur I find it funny that some really think this was done by the government. We know muslims hijacked planed we know what they did after we let them into out great nation and taught them how to fly. Our government did go train the extremist's long ago so their dirty hands we're involved that way but we know who did 9/11. I respect why you want to blame Bush and the government but no math will make me believe we build GOD like buildings that can stand anything.
MrREAPER2014 3 months ago
@MrREAPER2014 man you re so innocent and naiv ...typical bred american .... continue beeing a sheep. Since years they've been terrorists and terror attacks (of which I'm sure USA has his fingers on, without doubt) and they didnt manage to do more then bomb away themselves and others and suddenly they capture planes within usa simultaneously and succeed in crashing both WTC ??? man,just think twice and u'll understand that US fashist government is giving you only the stuff they want u to believe
Arrow3000 3 months ago
@Arrow3000 lol so there are no extremist terrorist's killing and bombing up shit in the name of islam and allah, there are no extremist's right now training children to grow up to be killers, there are no taliban beheading children even muslim children? Fact is that there are all of those things and more and more everyday. So no I'm not ready to buy the story that aliens we can't see or zionist's we can't see reall did it with remore control planes. Actions of extremist's speak louder than words
MrREAPER2014 3 months ago
@Arrow3000 Ahhaha the country you live you should know what is going on! Yes it's true the USA is not innocent and trained and armed osama, did the US do things that called for an attack from extremist's...YES we asked for it ok! We had it coming long ago and asked for it but so what. We STILL know who did, we know we let them into our country, we taught them how to fly and they blew our ass up! The US government was asking for something like this for a very long time but they did not do it!!!
MrREAPER2014 3 months ago
shorty40,your math and physic teachers should be very disappointed, your model is wrongly developed, just your assumption that human weight affects the building final resistance is just hilarious, not to mention your convention of signs,which doesnt affect the result though
deserticus18 5 months ago
This is a wonderful and simple mathematics should make it very clear to anyone with a basic understanding of physics. This shows that the NIST report is 10000 pages of crap paid for by your tax money. Yet the fail to even address the nature of the collapse. Talk about lack of ambition and honesty.
Thanks shorty for the explanation.
ikywyaapom 5 months ago
HAARP, Hutchison Effect
Benetleilaxyz 6 months ago
When the upper floors collapse, they fall on the lower floors crushing them ONE AT A TIME, adding their mass and increasing the acceleration. Ask yourself why NO structural engineers agree with the nonsense you are peddling.
RonaldWieck 6 months ago
Be carefulle, ( your right in your conclusion ) but you make a mistake in your physical théorie, because you assume that the forces are equal to a constant during all the cruch of the structur and of cours, it's fals.
timote18 6 months ago
@timote18 yes true , thank you for that. I realized that from the beginning and wrote it in the description.
shorty40merza 6 months ago
There are so many ways you can prove that there was a structural failure. The block fell and transferred it's energy to the base of the tower, and there are so many simple tests you can do to prove it if you don't think an energy transfer is "real".
Proof: Line up all 15 pool balls on the side of the pool table, and with the the cue ball, hit the first ball. When it hits, the 15th ball will move forward. Do the same test with the 15th ball backed up in a corner. Notice, everything collapses....
Unleeshd 7 months ago
@Unleeshd if the force was transferred from the falling section to the basement then the basement will break first but this didnt happen.
shorty40merza 6 months ago 7
@shorty40merza Only if the basement section wasn't supported by its foundations. Unleeshd's analogy remains consistent.
18vallancel 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shorty40merza also force is horizontal and not vertical so cue ball analogy is worthless! building design takes in to account of the horizontal impacts. take into account that very little energy is transferred to the core columns due to the great design of outer cage design! which absorbed majority of the planes impact and re-distributed the weight above to sides. I know it also increased the stress but cage on the impact side still there, and and all other sides nearly intact!
mysticusa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mysticusa not only cage design but also the floors which were full concrete blocks were there to absorb further energy before plane's kinetic energy is transferred to the core!estimations in the simulations should clearly show this. more to that every agrees fuel fire didnt cause any melt down as it didnt have enough temp or energy to do so even at much longer times! Openair burning temp of jet-a 260-315C n office materials dont burn at higher C. building would bend due to temp but not collapse
mysticusa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mysticusa what i mean is upper part of building would bend and partially damaged, not burst! and collapse like it did, as steel is not fragile material like plain concrete! or glass! free-fall would only occur if all core collumns were cut like a scissor at once or a perfect uniform concentrated fire over a significant amount of time continually fed! also dont forget fire proof covers and concrete blocks surround them!
mysticusa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
type in "give me 4 week abs" in the searcher box and click on the video with hearts in the title to learn how to get a 6 pack in 4 weeks.
julzat89 7 months ago 5
Comment removed
lumstyle 7 months ago
but you know if the government and Newton themselves came and said this same truth, people on you tube will STILL deny it!! but never the less brilliant videos and great job on physics!!
TheAten12 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone knows the Zionists are behind all of the FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS done in the U.S. The ruthless criminal Gang known as The Bush Family helped of course especially Dubbya and his Zionist Government Thugs such as Wolfowitz, Chertof, etc. The truth is we have no government, except corrupt little idiots at the local levels, only mouthpieces for the Zionists. Obama is our first "actor" president. The U. S. has no real president - only a guy who follows a teleprompter.
biggoyim 8 months ago
Really, how could this be a controlled demolition? You can clearly see that the implosions in both towers were started at the impacted floors. Do you think someone ran up the stairs and planted the explosives after the planes hit? Or do you think explosives were preplanted on every floor, come on... Also, one tower fell after 56 minutes of burning, the other after over 100 minutes of burning. Why wait so long before taking them out? The towers fell because of the damage+fires, WTC 7 is som. else
RewAq 8 months ago
@RewAq
If they had blown it right away it would'nt have been the media event that it was. Now you had full coverage and a schock effect also for the viewers becoming the most dramatic reality show ever to be created. Dick Cheney is an evil genius to quote anti terrorist advisor Richard Clarke though in another context.
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@sskinner99 No chance he's a sophomore in mechanical engineering. I say that because a mechanical engineer wouldn't use constant acceleration laws, nor would he have erred on his FBD. At the very least a limit state analysis of the perimeter and core columns for rupture is needed. Column's can rupture quite easily if forces are misaligned from the centroid, leaving not much to support all that mass. The building failed from bending, not normal stresses due to mass being dropped on it.
magnesiumchloride77 8 months ago
This is brilliant, even using the most optimistic calculations it makes no sense. Even someone (probably not as educated) like me can understand that the top block met feck all resistance on the way down even tho the bottom part of the tower including the supporting core, 42 supporting columns!! (undamaged, supposedly) was in the way???? And it fell in 10 seconds!!!!
CyberMaccie 9 months ago
3. Your calculations do not account for widely differing resistance factors WITHIN the structure itself (i.e. floor joints vs. trusses vs. central core, etc.) and therefore does not present a viable model for what happened. 4. Your initial calculation was for the upper x floors falling only a single floor (3.8 meters). In both cases the planes hit at angles knocking out portions of several floors, not a single floor. In the end you do not come near proving the case against structural failure.
axe2grind911 9 months ago
Ridiculous! Your calculations make many wrong assumptions: 1. That a single mass (the upper x floors) fell on another "mass" with opposing "force". In fact, the falling mass was cumulative and increased with each successive floor collapse. 2. The increasing cumulative mass was in fact gaining momentum (not losing as you hypothesize) since each successive floor collapse started with a greater initial velocity. (continued)
axe2grind911 9 months ago
great video, i cant understand why its still a debate, its so obvious it was a controlled demolition. Either that or that building was designed to fall apart. The force of the top floors falling probably wouldnt even equal to the top floors fully loaded. I wanna know what the maximum weight handling was for each floor. Somebody find out and add that up to see and compare it to the load that day.
wheelmanstan 9 months ago
THANK YOU!!!! Thank you!!! thank you!!!!
even I can grasp this!!!
(that means you've done EXCELLENT work!)
MeInTheCornfield 10 months ago
To do it a bit more properly you should take in account kinetic energy, too. At a rough estimate the collapse time would be half of the time you calculated. But nevertheless it will disprove the official version with the free fall speed.
dugall1 10 months ago
More importantly, this is a scaling issue, which truthers don't seem to be very good at. For example, weight is proportional to volume but strength is proportional to cross-sectional area (this is called the square/cube rule).
Gi0Piles 10 months ago
More importantly, this is a scaling issue, which truthers don't seem to be very good at. For example, weight is proportional to volume but strength is proportional to cross-sectional area (this is called the square/cube rule).
Gi0Piles 10 months ago
@Gi0Piles
And there is something deniers often forget. There are always security factors calculated in every construction, the more life is depending on it, usually the higher the security factors. Even if a third of the structure would disappear and the other two thirds would be weakened by 50% the building wouldn't collapse in this manner. Period.
I agree with the scaling factor.
But you also have to think of it as a NON-RIGID body and loss of significant material mass during collapse.
dugall1 10 months ago
Now you have seen all three parts always remember The weight of steel vs. concrete is important. Near the Earth's surface, gravitational potential energy is defined as weight times height. A piece of steel that falls from some given height will have 3x the kinetic energy as an identically sized piece of concrete falling from the same height (because steel is roughly 3x denser than concrete). Therefore, the steel piece is potentially 3x as destructive as the concrete piece when it hits.
Gi0Piles 10 months ago
Hello, Please excuse my ignorance, I am not an engineer of any type. I have found your videos very informative and appreciate very much that you shared them with us. Knowledge is the true power :) I may be missing this; but how did you take into account the cumulative additional mass of each collapsing floor? Wouldn't the additional mass cause acceleration? Thank you in advance for addressing my question-and plese accept my apologies if I have missed your explaniation of this variable.
freespiritjustsoul 11 months ago 210
@freespiritjustsoul Mass has nothing to do with acceleration when gravity is involved....If you drop a small apple and a big apple at the same time....They will hit the ground at the same time
lukealandrummond 5 months ago
@freespiritjustsoul Did you ever get an answer to this question?
MrREAPER2014 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3 NUKES 5 BOMBS A MISSILE A DEMOLITION CREW AND A LOT OF LIES = 911
dhudson369 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3 NUKES 5 BOMBS A MISSILE A DEMOLITION CREW AND A LOT OF LIES = 911
dhudson369 11 months ago
its so soo sooo ironic that something that is so obviously sinister, something so obvious as the way the buildings fell on 9/11, that we need ppl to go through 3 videos and useing all this mathematics just to prove wat was so obvious, im sorry to say this america but u r indeed fucked,anyway really well done videos
wild0hawk 11 months ago
Best most non biased video i have seen on this subject thanks!
And i didnt catch how you figured out the exact collapse time ( 10 seconds) could you let me know?
crashmidget15 11 months ago
At 1:05, you said the mass was 68,000 lbs, but then you wrote down 68,181,818 lbs.
Shouldn't it be in kilograms rather than lbs if you use that equation?
borgoat21 1 year ago
@borgoat21 I said Tonnes , you might have mistaken that with pounds because they sound similar. i only use Tonnes and kilograms in consistence with the formulas.
shorty40merza 1 year ago 3
@DonArsuk84 Were you born dumb? Or did it get progressively worse?
gonedoolali 1 year ago
So nicely explained and you have a real as if you were my friend personality to boot -Good to really great for a mark! THANK YOU GOD BLESS YOU
gonedoolali 1 year ago
One thing you didn't considered was the fact that in the moment of the colision the downward force isn't equal to the weight of the top part of the building.
You have to considerer the momentum and the impulse cause the force of something that's falling is always higher than its weight.
Even this "extra" force I believe still lower than the structural resistance.
Nice video, btw.
caiocesart 1 year ago
I don't believe the official story and am trying to understand these calculations so that I can raise them with my stubborn engineer uncle. In these calculations we assumed a constant upward resistance force; wouldn't the upward resistance decrease for a time at each floor once it's structural integrity had been compromised?
peaceviddie 1 year ago
@peaceviddie hi sir , yes we assumed the upward resistance force is constant which is not accurate because the resistance in a dynamic situation would vary at any given instance. this method is not conventional to calculate dynamic situations but i can bet that if you calculate the energetics it will not give you a time shorter than what i got. the proper way is by computing the energetics. or i refer you to a video watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ
shorty40merza 1 year ago
@shorty40merza Wow what a video. But I fail to see the point in it. at what point have you accounted for the building design and tilt of top section. Kids with no brains actually think this video is proof of a Controlled demolition? This video is ruining peoples lives its making them believe conspiracy nonsense which in turn makes them look stupid.
TheLHOser 7 months ago
@TheLHOser there are hundreds of videos to prove that the attack was an inside job lol.people like you even after seeing the truth will say conspiracy theory.I say Govt: made conspiracy to collapse the building and Critical thinkers made Theory to prove that it was an inside job and there is nothing wrong lolIt should be so..and American people do deserve to know the truth. know thousands of Architectures and physicists say it is surely an inside job with scientific proof. u leave this one lol
jery61007 5 months ago
@jery61007 know thousands of Architectures and physicists. HA HA HA
I know millions of structural engineers world demo experts that say your wrong these people are in the the correct field to comment "Architectures" lol "hundreds of videos to prove that the attack was an inside " And it takes only a hand full of videos to prove them wrong.
PS is one of the hundreds of videos this one because it is wrong so badly. Maths and formulas are correct but meaningless as usual in truth vids.
TheLHOser 5 months ago
@TheLHOser can you please show me one Video that prove it was not an inside Job lol u can only show me some official claims and nothing else.. is it fair to believe that an area that is highly secured with all the new technology overtaken by Terrorists.one of the interesting Americans sophisticated radar system can't even find the flight.it is really absurd to believe so.Politicians are not the way you think lol they have their own corporate and Zionist agenda and they will do anything for that
jery61007 5 months ago
@jery61007 "can you please show me one Video that prove it was not an inside Job lol u can only show me some official claims and nothing else." Wrong again but your level of research on this is useless. That is to say your thick.
"even after seeing the truth will say conspiracy theory" Really what truth is this! every truther video lies in some way making its points invalid even this video is wrong. but when you grow up you will see this HA HA HA HA
TheLHOser 5 months ago
@TheLHOser"hundreds of videos to prove that the attack was an inside And it takes only a hand full of videos to prove them wrong." above is ur comment, then prove with your handful of Videos that those are incorrect..I don't think all video are true but many of them explains reasons why it is said it was an inside Job and the reasons are provable with scientific and eyewitness or survivors.many survivors have already claimed they heard explosion inside WTC many times
jery61007 5 months ago
@jery61007 BBC conspiracy files. these videos explain all and disprove everything from the likes of A&E and many others. you claim science as proof but have been fooled again plz read the RJ LEE report.
" .many survivors have already claimed they heard explosion inside WTC many times" oh please not this one its been explained many times as to what these noises were. sounds like explosions is what many of these eyewitnesses meant.
TheLHOser 5 months ago
@TheLHOser you have history of Hitler and what he did for his political benefits........
jery61007 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jery61007 "you have history of Hitler and what he did for his political benefits........ "
Godwin's law buddy plus this makes no sense.
TheLHOser 5 months ago
Comment removed
jery61007 5 months ago
abz2000123 10 months ago
@peaceviddie "a" at freefall with air resistance is noticably lower.
so the lower floors would have had to have disappeared before the upper floors reached them.
how can 47 floors of bolts snap simultaneously & symmetrically due to open air fire?
why did all the structural steel reinforced with concrete pulverize into dust or resist less than thin air- when no plane hit it ?
visit: h t t p : / / abz2000 . c o m / falseflagterror . a s p x
for the full calculation -& please tell me his response
abz2000123 10 months ago
this is a fire: watch?v=-D9xf-zJ5gI&feature=fvw
... nothing collapsed there...
Mariachi842 1 year ago
@ 6.20 excellent.....fishy .....falls on itself in under 10 seconds ,minimal resistance
211for11 1 year ago
Excellant vid, very competant rough calculation & good review of extenuating conditions ie. decreased mass of falling 'block' due to expansion of disintegrating debris countered by increasing resistance of lower support structure.
This result of t = 42 (44) seconds is very close to the 45 seconds I saw several years ago in a graph-plotted calculation. It confirms the basic understanding of conservation of momentum, a 361 m skyscraper CANNOT disintegrate thru itself in 10 to 15 sec.
starmanskye 1 year ago
and what do you want to suggest with it? the building was exploded by CIA on purpose?
BonFire110 1 year ago
@BonFire110 -- The scientifically-derived conclusion reached here does not invariably lead to your premise. It is evidence that directly contradicts the official explanation of towers' collapse. Perhaps that is why many people refuse to look at the evidence of official fraud objectively, they cannot bear accepting a sole conclusion they assume is the only one, ie. the whole CIA/Pentagon institutions must be involved. Truthseeking requires following evidence wherever it leads, cost irregardless.
starmanskye 1 year ago
@starmanskye THX for your respond. Now, I guess, I start to understand the thing.
BonFire110 1 year ago
well daggit you just ruined my new theory. I'm not so sure I can run at cars and just demolish them?, hehe,.. petty good vid
SPAGHETTIMONSTER1 1 year ago
I watched all 3 video's and was VERY impressed ! You made your point. . .and then some.I wish EVERYONE could see and appreciate this !
muserwood 1 year ago
Even if the physics were not provided, it is obvious that the building was subject to demolition. It fell at the rate of gravity. In addition, what about the words of Silverstein to "PULL" building 7? A pull job does not happen in a couple of hours. It takes weeks of planning. This whole fiasco was a means by which the United States government could go to war. My view on the war on terror is that the United States terrorizes their own. Sad is what it is.
Arachnidia 1 year ago
So buildings are big solid lumps of metal, with no air or space within? Contrary to popular belief, the world trade center did not have the material density of a tree. If the science behind this logic he uses were sound, axes would not be able to cut down trees, and there would be no difference between a dum dum bullet and a regular bullet. In carcrashes only one car would be damaged, since the one travelling slowest would have to be rigged with explosives, for it to take any damage
DonArsuk84 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DonArsuk84 watch?v=xYW-z7nrTZk to see a home made THERMITE DEVICE.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
@DonArsuk84 Horrible, horrible comment here. Absolutely irrelevant to the subject matter. Basically every point you posted is debunked by high school physics. Sorry dude!
rubeeye127 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LeBron23JamesFan the sides of the towers collapsed inward and the top part fell over it causing it to collapse Really?? in all the footage I've seen, the sides seem to go outward...
fievel2680 1 year ago
the sides of the towers collapsed inward and the top part fell over it causing it to collapse
LeBron23JamesFan 1 year ago
the sides of the towers collapsed inward and the top part fell over it
LeBron23JamesFan 1 year ago
Example why we as Americans are doomed.First video gets 96k hits and lowers to 9k.Guitar hero generation zombies have the attention span of a knat.I wonder if thell have xbox in my Fema camp?
vagabonddom 1 year ago 5
This goes on and on. For each floor, you can assune that the columns can buckle elastically at most by 10% of their length before they fail. Do math correctly and you will find that the downward acceleration (90%) distance) outpaces the resistance 10% of the distance), even if you allow for a safety factor of 3 times the static load, and a total average of about 2/3 g must be expected. This fits very well with the observed duration of the collapse.
PapaOystein 1 year ago 3
There is an obvious flaw in your model, shorty40merza: When the top block travels down at 8.63m/s, at initial contact with the lower block it gets decelerated, true. But it keeps going down, straining and then buckling and breaking the columns below. This will happen after a short distance. Once columns break, they offer no resistance, and the top block (now enlarged by additional failing floors) will be accelerated by gravity (g) again.
PapaOystein 1 year ago 3
The columns did not melt, they were softened by the heat of the fire. Most of the fire proofing was blown off by the impact of the plane. So the steel had no protection from the heat of the fire.
Why are you calculating the bottom floors accelerating up? Your theory is flawed, thinking that the lower floors would stop the upper collapsing floors because they have supported them for 30 years.
The lower part of the tower is stronger to support the vertical load of the building.
lonegull 1 year ago
@lonegull Steel dose not melt until you reach temp of 3000 degrees. Most of the fuel from the plane would have been used up in the first explosion, also steel used in builds like the WTC would be high grade steel that can hold more than 3000 degrees....lonegull dose it really make sense to you that a small section of the top would cause the building to come down in 10sec?????? use your fuking head...dam
TeamAlphaTwo7 1 year ago
Your argument is that the lower 95 floors should support the falling 15 floors above it? Have you heard of load stress, vertical load distribution. The floors were designed to handle only a specific amount of load, not infinite amount. The upper 15 floors falling on to the lower floors would have over loaded those floors, causing them to fail and they would cause the floors below to fail...etc.
lonegull 1 year ago
Thank you for helping me to learn some physics. Very well made video, even of I don't agree with it.
Gabumon54321 1 year ago
Comment removed
gwr3n 1 year ago
From your arguments it is natural to argue that 10 seconds --- the actual time it took for the whole tower to reach the ground --- equates the free fall speed. Free fall speed occurs only when an object (in our case the top part of the tower) is let falling in empty space. And the only way to obtain empty space below the block and achieve free fall speed is to remove (i.e. destroy) what is standing below.
gwr3n 1 year ago
merza, you have done an excellent explanation. 44 seconds is ~ 6 times slower than what hapenned. I think gravity there was a gravitational force shift that day accelerate the freefall. Thunbs Up
nassimj 1 year ago
@nassimj
The drop was 15 and 22 seconds, many videos of the collapse shows this, just take a stopwatch and measure it yourself. Don't confuse the rubble at free fall with the actual structure. The rubble is obscuring the structure that is still collapsing.
Something wrong in the calculations, he is forgetting that the structural break moves down and the mass above the breaks becomes bigger and bigger.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@nassimj or explosive decompression caused by demolition :) think about it, why do demolition teams wire buildings so that the collapse INWARD when the charges go off ?
revcletis 1 year ago
what about a tower of cards? If you take one card out, all of them fall..
JustinPrasad221 1 year ago