• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Physics explanation sought

TruthSeeker1234 said:
Objects which are falling fall straight down, unless acted upon by some other force. Clearly the material in the photo is falling down and to the left, that is to the north. Please tell me what force is present to explain this.
Click to expand...

Well, I can explain what you think you are "clearly" seeing. It's called Wood's Syndrome.
 
So, let's see if I understand.

If the buildings fell straight into their own footprint, that would be evidence for a CD.

If the buildings do not fall straight into their own footprint, that is evidence for a CD.

It's all so clear now. My eyes are opened.
 
A W Smith said:
I bet the huge Colgate Fan in the forground had something to do with the wind speed
[qimg]http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc65_small.JPG[/qimg]
Click to expand...

You've found it! The smoking gun!

Has Dylan been alerted to this?

(Clearly, the fan was used to blow the airliners off course!)
 
WilliamSeger said:
Even worse, he's trying to infer 4D characteristics from a 2D image. Is that beyond stupid?
Click to expand...
You know, I was going to include time in my post, but wasn't sure if it would really add value to it or if it would jmust confused things for our little musician. Glad someone else thought of it too.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Physics exlanation:

5mph equals 2 meters per second (a meter is roughly equal to a yard, for those unable to use metric). The picture in question is taken appr. 5 seconds into the collapse. So the dust that has been in he air the longest has been displaced 10 meters by the wind.
........

Hans
Click to expand...

Even less than 10 meters since the effect of the wind will not be immediate (due to inertia of the object)
The side force on an object is equal to the drag force which is proportional to the velocity of the wind relative to the object. The object initially has a sideways velocity of zero and only that drag force(air resistence) can give it any sideways movement. That force will then acellerate the object , as it starts to move the velocity of the wind wrt to the object becomes less and so the force pushing it sideways becomes less also and so its sideways acelleration becomes less as well. The object will eventually approach the same ground speed as the wind though it will never actually acheive the same velocity as the wind.


T1234's problem it seems is in not understanding why debris is being thrust outward from the tower at all and furthermore why it seems to be sending more in one direction than others.

When the collapse starts the upper section hits the lower , stationary portion of the building. That falling mass has momentum, it transfers some of that momentum to the lower portion but the lower portion simply cannot 'get out of the way' quickly enough and the mass that has fallen on it has to go somewhere. the only 'where' it can go is out to the side of the building so that is where it goes.

Take the simplification one step up. The falling debris is mostly within the lower section perimeter walls. Those walls are basically a box. Imagine pouring sand and gravel into an empty milk carton. As it fills the sides bulge. drop the sand into it very quickly and you may in fact burst the carton. That milk carton though is specifically designed as a container, the walls of the WTC towers were not and there is an enormous mass of fast moving debris filling the tower forcing the walls outward. That force gets greater as the building collapses and the debris is moving faster.

The non-uniform distribution of the debris is not suprising. I expect that some of it is due to the initial hit on the building by the plane which would bias the initial debris to fall somewhat toward the hole. However once the collapse gets started one simply could not predict which direction might get favored. A previous poster is correct in saying that the chaotic situation is responsible. think of it this way , in the case of the milk carton, when it bursts it has to burst someplace and once it does the sand will come out that side thus biasing movement in that direction.

Gravy uses the pop can illustration. Same idea , the direction of first failure will bias the direction of movement.

Here's another illustration; take three squares of toilet paper still all connected. Hold onto it at each end and give a sharp tug. Each time they will separate at one perforation line and you will have two squares in one hand(still connected to each other) and one square in the other hand. You will probably never see the center square drop out and leave you with one square in each hand. You will probably(all things being equal) also note that the chances of either your right or left hand being the one holding the single sheet is 50%.

Oh and this only applies if one utilizes previously unused T.P.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Here's another illustration; take three squares of toilet paper still all connected. Hold onto it at each end and give a sharp tug. Each time they will separate at one perforation line and you will have two squares in one hand(still connected to each other) and one square in the other hand. You will probably never see the center square drop out and leave you with one square in each hand. You will probably(all things being equal) also note that the chances of either your right or left hand being the one holding the single sheet is 50%.

Oh and this only applies if one utilizes previously unused T.P.
Click to expand...
Ah HAH! So THAT'S why I couldn't get consistent results! (well maybe the fact that the T.P. was wet also had something to do with it).

What is the load-bearing capacity of 3 pieces of wet African toilet paper? Could they in fact support 6 empty soda cans?
 
Last edited:
Golldarnit, I thought the towers fell "in their own footprint"? Now TS1234 is asking why it _didn't_ fall in its own footprint?

How can I keep up with all these claims?
 
pgwenthold said:
Golldarnit, I thought the towers fell "in their own footprint"? Now TS1234 is asking why it _didn't_ fall in its own footprint?

How can I keep up with all these claims?
Click to expand...


Because everything is evidence of CD even those things which would be, in a world of logic in which most people live, mutually exclusive.

Just the very fact that the buildings were erected in the first place is evidence of a CD that occurs 30 years later( ala' Christophera)
 
jaydeehess said:
Even less than 10 meters since the effect of the wind will not be immediate (due to inertia of the object)
The side force on an object is equal to the drag force which is proportional to the velocity of the wind relative to the object. The object initially has a sideways velocity of zero and only that drag force(air resistence) can give it any sideways movement. That force will then acellerate the object , as it starts to move the velocity of the wind wrt to the object becomes less and so the force pushing it sideways becomes less also and so its sideways acelleration becomes less as well. The object will eventually approach the same ground speed as the wind though it will never actually acheive the same velocity as the wind.


T1234's problem it seems is in not understanding why debris is being thrust outward from the tower at all and furthermore why it seems to be sending more in one direction than others.

When the collapse starts the upper section hits the lower , stationary portion of the building. That falling mass has momentum, it transfers some of that momentum to the lower portion but the lower portion simply cannot 'get out of the way' quickly enough and the mass that has fallen on it has to go somewhere. the only 'where' it can go is out to the side of the building so that is where it goes.

Take the simplification one step up. The falling debris is mostly within the lower section perimeter walls. Those walls are basically a box. Imagine pouring sand and gravel into an empty milk carton. As it fills the sides bulge. drop the sand into it very quickly and you may in fact burst the carton. That milk carton though is specifically designed as a container, the walls of the WTC towers were not and there is an enormous mass of fast moving debris filling the tower forcing the walls outward. That force gets greater as the building collapses and the debris is moving faster.

The non-uniform distribution of the debris is not suprising. I expect that some of it is due to the initial hit on the building by the plane which would bias the initial debris to fall somewhat toward the hole. However once the collapse gets started one simply could not predict which direction might get favored. A previous poster is correct in saying that the chaotic situation is responsible. think of it this way , in the case of the milk carton, when it bursts it has to burst someplace and once it does the sand will come out that side thus biasing movement in that direction.

Gravy uses the pop can illustration. Same idea , the direction of first failure will bias the direction of movement.

Here's another illustration; take three squares of toilet paper still all connected. Hold onto it at each end and give a sharp tug. Each time they will separate at one perforation line and you will have two squares in one hand(still connected to each other) and one square in the other hand. You will probably never see the center square drop out and leave you with one square in each hand. You will probably(all things being equal) also note that the chances of either your right or left hand being the one holding the single sheet is 50%.

Oh and this only applies if one utilizes previously unused T.P.
Click to expand...

*bump*
 
Double post. See below.

(I have not apologized! Fight the power!)
 
Last edited:
I was going to make yet another comment about the fact that Truthseeker4321 has come back even though I have not apologized, but honestly I'm just so happy that he stuck around for a couple posts before abandoning the thread that I think I'll let it pass.

Congratulations, Ace, on vaguely not spamming the forum with yet another thread you had no intention of returning to. Sort of.

N.B. This post shall not constitute an apology. Void where prohibitted. Price does not include tax, title or fees.
 
Hans is right. The wind is blowing from left to right in the picture. The dust which has been in the air the longest will have blown the farthest.

It is a very simple explanation.

Any talk about "non uniform distribution of debris" is completely irrelevant gobbledy-gook. Gravy, and others, you are so habituated to obfucscating and confusing everything that you did so here without stopping to think.

Gravy, read what Hans wrote, and compare that to what you wrote. Hilarious.

I still would like to see a video from the west, and have not found one. Anybody know of one?
 
The twin towers were not square, so even under ideal circumstances, there will not be a uniform distribution of debris.
 
Yes, the debris should have fallen in an exact, perfect circle. Just like if you accidentally dump out a box of nails. They land in a perfect, exact, geometric pattern, and any deviation from that perfect circle of nails would be sign of a conspiracy somehow.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Hans is right. The wind is blowing from left to right in the picture. The dust which has been in the air the longest will have blown the farthest.

It is a very simple explanation.

Any talk about "non uniform distribution of debris" is completely irrelevant gobbledy-gook. Gravy, and others, you are so habituated to obfucscating and confusing everything that you did so here without stopping to think.

Gravy, read what Hans wrote, and compare that to what you wrote. Hilarious.

I still would like to see a video from the west, and have not found one. Anybody know of one?
Click to expand...
I heard that the guy who told young men to go west has one. Horace Greeley. Okay, his ghost. Anyway the ghostly Horace Greeley decided to go west himself and he took a video of the debris cloud as he was leaving. Since he already lives in the clouds it's a pretty clear video. He is supposed to put it up on BooTube in a week or so.

I called him up, got his machine:

"Hello, this is the ghost of Horace Greeley. Please do not leave your name and number - I already know who you are. For information about faces in the smoke, press 1. For Cleveland Ghost Flight 93, press 2. For invisible space beam weapons, press 3. Otherwise please stay in your basement and someone will scare you out of your soiled briefs shortly. Boo!"
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Hans is right. The wind is blowing from left to right in the picture. The dust which has been in the air the longest will have blown the farthest.

It is a very simple explanation.

Any talk about "non uniform distribution of debris" is completely irrelevant gobbledy-gook. Gravy, and others, you are so habituated to obfucscating and confusing everything that you did so here without stopping to think.

Gravy, read what Hans wrote, and compare that to what you wrote. Hilarious.

I still would like to see a video from the west, and have not found one. Anybody know of one?
Click to expand...


Since you put so much weight on video/photographic evidence, I just have to ask: do you not believe in such things as atoms, neutrons, electrons, protons, quantum physics, black holes, etc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom