Originally posted by subz
Listen you cretin. Any one that has done high school physics can tell you how a body falls due to gravity.
You dont need to be a damn expert to know how a building that collapses should fall. It should fall a lot slower than a free falling object in a
If a portion of the building's exterior walls broke free and fell on the outside of the building envelope as the collapse progressed, then those
portions would have fallen in free fall, would they have not?
If the density of the debris that fell outside of the building was a continuous spectrum from solid chunks of steel and concrete to extremely fine
dust, then one would expect that the front of the debris cloud that fell outside the building would be falling at the speed of free fall. Since this
debris cloud obscured the actual progress of the collapse, you have no real proof on how long it actually took the building to fall, now do you,
If the building pancake collapsed then all that concrete and steel would severely impede its fall! It couldnt fall to the ground in 8
seconds if there was any resistance whatsoever. I'd call the compression of concrete, steel, people, furniture and rubble "resistance".
You do realize, that the building is 97% air, don't you?
If the floor directly below the collapsing section had to compress/pancake before the next floor underneath compressed (simple physics here
Muaddib) then the time take for it to fall would be much longer than a free falling object in a vacuum.
Compress what? the air? what are you talking about?
Once the first floor collapsed, there was nothing to stop it until it impacted the floor slab below it. at that point, the floor would only offer
resistance until it's failure point was reached. Since this point would only be a small fraction of the energy hitting it, the impact of the first
floor would only deter the falling mass slightly, thus when the falling mass hit the second floor, it not only had the energy of the 12 foot drop, but
it also had the additional left over energy from the first 12 feet, and so on and so on. By the time 5 or 6 floors had failed, the downward energy
would have been so much greater than the resistance that the resistance would have quickly become trivial.
A further consideration has to be given to the construction of the building. It is apparent from the photographs that as the buildings collapsed, the
exterior walls peeled outward like a banana. This is due in large part to the unique structural design of the building.
The outward pressure of the falling mass on the exterior walls pushed the walls away from the floors, breaking the connections even before the falling
mass hit the floors.
Now if the building didnt have to pancake its floors to fall down (i.e. the supporting beams were blown up in sequence) it is possible for it
to collapse faster than a free falling body. Because it didnt collapse from a free fall after all!
Man, that is another good sig worthy line, since it makes no sense at all.
The only sound explanation that doesnt flout the LAWS OF PHYSICS is that it was demolished. Physics is incontrovertible and you
can try your slimey spin manouvers as much as you like with this fact.
8 seconds for a building to collapse of the height of the WTC is impossible! P E R I O D
Again like I posted above, you have no definite proof that the building collapsed in 8 seconds. You can prove that the exterior debris took 8 seconds
or so to fall, but what would that prove, since that is exactly what physics tells us should have happened.