9/11 Conspiracies
- Thread starter SaulToPaul 2
- Start date
ke=1/2mv^2 Kinetic Energy
Internal structural failure cause by fire weakening the two main supports of the building. If you watch the videos of the collapse you can see the internal failure by the way the building starts to move and the way the windows start to break. Really fascinating study in structural failure analysis.
There was wreckage on the outside. They found engine parts and landing gear.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-22344949
Colorado Springs 737 crash
This is a story about what happens to a plane when it hits the ground nose first. Note the date line: this was long before 9/11/
Structural engineers knew. Gravity pulls straight down. When supports fail, what ever they are supporting will fall straight down. The only way a building tips is if the support from only one side is removed. That wasn't the case at 9/11. The supports for the upper parts of the building failed and dropped the upper part of the building straight down onto the lower building acting like a pile driver.
I would think the aluminum would get the brunt of the damage, not the concrete and steel.
This is why you need scientists and engineers. We don't go by what we think, we examine the evidence using scientific principles to determine what actually happened.
They do design for airplane strikes. Seriously. After the B-25 hit the Empire State building in 1945 engineers have included airplane hits in their design. The buildings survived the air plane hit!
The buildings were also designed to survive fires for a period of time and they did.
What they were not designed to survive was and airplane strike AND uncontrolled fires. One or the other but not both.
How thick is thick? How big are the beams? There is not enough information here to answer your question. If it is a decorative wall that lines many of the highways in Denver, the wall is going to be destroyed with significant but survivable damage to the bus. If it is a wall that they use at the end of the rocket rail then the wall has a few dings and the bus is pretty well trashed.
This is the problem with conspiracy theorists, they assume they know things that they actually have no clue about. You assume you know about concrete and steel when have no clue. How is concrete reinforced? How much reinforcement is needed? What size is the steel? Is it in compression or tension? Is ti spanning or a column? All of this plays into how a structure will respond when hit by an external force.
Correct.
They were designed for accidents. not intentional combat actions. The planes were used as missiles, exactly as al-qaeda said they would.
How can you even ask these questions 16 years later? What kind of garbage do you read?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Are you 100% certain that an aluminum plane could penetrate the steel and concrete?
Should the plane have decelerated at all on impact?
Do you think the government has been 100% honest with the facts?
Its called an impulse function. The force is applied over an extremely small period of time. The plane decelerates but not nearly enough to significantly slow it. Instead, the energy is absorbed by the deformation and failure both the plane and the building.
Steel is not an infinitely strong material, it bends and tears and breaks when subjected to forces greater than then strength of the steel as determined by it dimensions, alloy and temper. Consider that formula for kinetic energy: 1/2mv^2
The weight of a 767 is about 395,00 pounds at take-off. The estimated velocity of the planes when they hit the tower was about 500mph. If you do the math, the kinetic energy of the plane hitting the building = 3.706 billion ft lbs force (5,024,650 Kilojoules). That converts to 1,654,464 ton -force. That is over a million and a half tons striking the building. D0 you think 1.6 million tons of force is enough to break steel?
In terms of the the physics of the collapses, yes. I think there may be political components that we do not know about. There is nothing to support a controlled demolition of any of the buildings. Our government is no where nearly competent enough to pull of a false flag operation of this magnitude without it being leaked.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Is there enough kinetic energy in a wing to slice through steel and concrete?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
They made a ton of errors, for sure.
So yes or no (not to be blunt), it was common knowledge prior to 9/11 that the towers would withstand a hurricane, but not an airliner full of fuel?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I've read that the builders believed they could withstand attacks from multiple 707s.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
attacks or accidental crashes?
I've heard similar things, that it was a surprise that they crumpled based on the attack. Was it a surprise or not? If it was not a surprise to somebody, then that's where my energy is on this question, otherwise I have no problem that the majority view is the correct view.