Originally posted by ANOK
...
But the towers did fall symmetrically, in other words all four corners fell at the same time and speed, and the towers did not as a mass fall anywhere
but straight down.
Well I have watched the few comparison videos of actual CD and honestly I do not see the CD buildings doing the exact all four corners down at the
same time that WTC7 did. In fact I would go so far to say that in comparison that the CD's look sloppy compared to WTC7, if WTC7 is the model for
"perfect".
Now for a question, what would a building do exactly in your opinion? Would it lean and fall like a tree? Topple like a Jenga tower? Fall like a house
of cards? None of those structures have vertical and horizontal forces (steal beams) attempting the tower stable.
Back to videos of actual CD, notice that on most every one that the central vertical support is removed and horizontal forces pull the building into
itself much like a row of dominos in reverse, fanning inwards instead of outwards.
WTC7 appears to me to have lost its horizontal force and dropped straight and level and that the outer structure held at the top and sides. Notice the
rubble in the picture you posted there are large sections of the outer facade that remained in more or less whole pieces.
Now in your mind think of a house of cards, toothpicks, stack of cord wood or even the game Don't Break the Ice. Now remove a single level without
placing another outside force of sliding the level out. What happens? Does it drop a level evenly or unevenly? Does the stress the drop cause a
collapse?
In a building, the vertical holds the horizontal up and the horizontal prevents a shearing stress against the vertical. WTC7 did not lose all the
vertical and horizontal support on one side else it would have toppled or crumbled like a sand castle. But if it retained the horizontal forces and
lost enough of the vertical it would begin to shear. That shearing , without external sideways force, would cause the remaining vertical forces to
bend until a floor was lost. The above weight would fall vertically in a uniform manner until resisted enough to not fall vertically.
Go back again to the actual confirmed CD videos of other buildings. Central vertical support is removed and the building falls in on itself. Just like
a sand castle if you dig into from the center.
So now comes my speculation as to what the force was to overcome the undamaged vertical columns of WTC7 since the debris raining down on it alone
wasn’t enough. Remember those two very large buildings across the street that fell? That was quite a lot of vibration that entered the ground. So
much vibration that it was detected on seismographs. Was it not Tesla that worked on harmonic resonance in New York by pounding on the iron support
columns in a building and timing the return resonance from the Earth? Metal is shaped by heat and force. Heat was present from the fires, constant
force was present from the gravity. How long would the resonant force take to return to the area by the Earth pushing back from the downward force of
the two towers collapse?
It may seem fantastically far fetched that resonance would have been enough to additionally weaken already weakened and further weakening vertical
support, but can that influence be ignored completely? Could the asymmetric force of vibration been enough to disrupt a building that could have
otherwise stood? I don’t know but it seems to me that a natural and known to be real physical force to be a bit more plausible than a black ops
force of 30-40 expert building demolitionists entering , setting up and exiting a burning building and pulling it 7 hours after the other two and no
one saw any of these people?
