To thedman, the angry skeptic:
There exists an immense lack of reading and subsequent comprehension skill at this forum.
Before jumping in, take the time to try to really understand what I am hinting at, and what possible scenarios I already touched upon in my text.
You only see and choose one, and hurry to use the so well-known, by now, disdain, to impulsively react, without taking the time to let it sink in and
analyze what I offer.
I have seen you offer good solid factual information at first, but lately you tend to show a lot of anger and disdain to people with a different
Take my advice, calmly analyze what gets posted, and try to keep a neutral stance on skepticism.
I had the same reaction aimed at opponents, but later learned from many of them, that there are many instances where I had to admit that there were
two different sides on that specific dime.
And on a side note, knowing you said to be a firefighter, one of my main reasons to stay focused on what I know to be true, are the transcripts and
the voices of all these BRAVE firefighters, policemen and other rescue personnel who died on that day, giving their lives for an already lost case.
And I am still, after all these years, getting VERY emotional and ANGRY when remembering the despair in their voices, and the sudden understanding
just before collapse began.
Don’t give in to emotional prejudice; keep using cold logic in your analysis.
For your info, I have edited the following text about 200 times, before posting it, to be as precise as can be to leave no room for misunderstanding,
even for the less schooled readers here.
It took many hours to compose, just this one post.
If you re-read all my nearly 1000 posts on this board, you will find the same aspiration in the research ones.
I hope the skeptics show me the same courtesy from now on.
There are three possible sound paths and arrivals of a WTC-specific sound signal, picked up by Richard's microphone, and one visual real-time
WTC-event belonging to that WTC-specific sound signal picked up by the CCD chip of the camera at light speed:
1. One sound path solely by water, and its arrival “?” seconds later at the mike:
This is the acoustic shadow option, uncertain, but possible.
2. One sound path solely by air, and its arrival “? + x” seconds later at the mike:
This is Rick’s sound-and-view synchronization option, uncertain, but possible.
3. One sound path by water, followed by one sound path by air, and thus 2 seemingly different, but in fact event-identical signals were arriving at
the mike with a fixed interval of “x” seconds:
This is my, LT’s option, quite certain, but proof must be provided by observing Rick’s tape data.
The impression on the listener of an event-identical sound signal can be different, for a sound passed through water and one through air, since water
is a dispersive medium and in such, sound speed is a function of sound frequency.
The spatial and temporal distribution of a propagating disturbance will continually change.
Each frequency component propagates at its own phase velocity, while the energy of the disturbance propagates at the group velocity.
The same phenomenon occurs with light waves.
And since the sounds picked up by Rick’s microphone were low frequency, these can be dispersed differently through salt water, for different
frequencies, all still originating from the same event-identical sound.
This is the most complicated form of my, LT’s option; seismic signals and water carried sound signals were arriving as a train of signals, followed
substantially later by the air carried signals.
Most certain, but needs further proof.
In other words, you could feel the total seismic energy of the same event-identical sound arrive through the bedrock at circa 2.0 km/s via the
pressure receptors in your feet’s soles standing firm on Rick’s pier, then you heard and still felt the arrival of the water-carried signals at
1500 m/s (1.5 km/s), and then you heard the arrival of the air-carried signals at 341.5 m/s (0.34 km/s).
How far apart expressed in seconds, these three arrivals were, will be your next task.
Seismic energy arrival = 0
Sound by water arrival = + ?
Sound by air arrival = + ??
To solve the unknowns, we have to go to Rick’s 911 Eyewitness video to look-up their calculations for the distance to the Towers from the first pier
he filmed off, and the second pier he filmed off, after being whisked away from the first pier by security officers.
Have a look at the following data first, which can also assist you in your own calculations for the aforementioned factors “?” and “x” in the
3 possible sound paths:
A. The acceleration of falling debris due to gravity is 9.8 m/s^2.
B. The approximate speed of seismic signals was 2 km/s for New York STATE bedrock from Manhattan to LDEO’s Palisades station; how fast it was,
exactly, between the Twin Towers and WTC 7, and the 2 piers at Hoboken from where Richard Siegel was filming, is unknown to me, it can be different
from the LDEO calculated speed of 2 km/s, but it won’t be substantially much less or more, in my opinion.
C. Rick’s tape showed these 9 time stamps for the first, WTC 2 (South Tower) pre-collapse sounds:
interval 5 sec.
interval 11 sec.
interval 30 sec.
interval 3 sec.
interval 2 sec.
interval 1 sec.
interval 15 sec.
Intervals: ?? – 5 – 11 – 30 – 3 – 2 – 1 – 15 seconds.
Start the 11:04 long embedded video, pause at 00:31.
You and I need the raw data from the Research Edition, to make an educated guess about this theory.
"911 Raw The Research Edition" is the complete recording of the destruction of the North and South Towers. The sound is not enhanced, the
video not altered. It is captured in its raw original data state and duplicated on this DVD as an encyclopedic work for research into the real
causes of the three cement and steel skyscrapers destroyed in New York City that day.
"911 Raw The Research Edition" DVD Plus EXTRAS!
* Raw South and North Tower destruction recordings
* Raw Time-lapse of WTC 7 Implosion.
* Raw video from the night of September 11, 2001
* Raw video from the day of September 12, 2001
* Special Video interview with Richard A. Siegel
It is very instructive
to listen to his embedded videos in this post and thread by Insolubrious:
This is quite fascinating in my opinion. It’s a time lapse of Siegel’s footage with enhanced audio to emphasis the explosions.
Firstly, the recording has been sped up to approx 600%; this allows us to make new visual observations in terms of the progress of collapse. What is
more revealing though is the audio. When you speed up the audio the very low bass frequencies that are often not picked up by laptop or low quality
hi-fi speakers becomes audible, since your shifting the lower harmonics into a higher frequency range, although the sounds become shorter in length
the audio details are still there.
Secondly, I filtered the audio dampening all frequencies above 200-300 Hz allowing for the bass (just the explosions) to pass through. You may notice
people talking like chipmunks in the background which is the wins 10-10 News broadcast on fast forward.
Read much more from that Opening Post, and I hope you’ll be interested to read the whole thread, which is in my opinion a very important one.