It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Heiwa Challenge

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Anyone interested in winning $12917.99 or $10000 Euro, then just beat this challenge. No one has done it as of july 9th, 2010.

heiwaco.tripod.com...




posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Could one use Jenga blocks?

It says that "Before drop test (see 8.) the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart. Connections or joints between elements cannot rely solely on friction."

"Small lateral impact" is a pretty subjective term, and as far as I know, connections between elements in a Jenga tower rely on gravity and the normal force rather than friction. Maybe with a good lawyer you could snag the prize on this basis, although the legal fees might eat up most of your winnings...






[edit on 7/20/10 by silent thunder]



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
you must follow all the requirements, not just one.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Heiwa is japanese for universal harmony, or living as one with all things, or that kind of sentiment (:



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Nobody is going to take that money.

Congratulations to Anders Björkman and his compnay for realizing that they don't have to play dopey just because the Americans are doing it.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by dudly
 


What a load of bollocks!!

You take this seriously? Anyone who does doesn't understand physics, mass, inertia, momentum...scaling it down isn't a valid comparison...


Here, look, this is what they actually say!


It can be any size!


Utterly moronic, and not worth your time and effort to post. You'd think even high school physics students would see it's ridiculous, in the extreme....

...IF (as I am assuming) this is some sort of attempt to ridicule the tragic events of 9/11.

The depths of depravity and inanity they go to in order to mock is vile and disrespectful --- as are most of the so-called "truth movement:.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
as far as I know, connections between elements in a Jenga tower rely on gravity and the normal force rather than friction.


Gravity and the normal force only act upon the vertical axis. Technically the connecting surfaces are never 100% perfectly flat and level (like they would have to be for gravity alone to "connect" the pieces), and this would cause horizontal forces and then eventually vertical movement to develop across the surfaces.

To deny that friction is holding stacked jenga blocks together, would be equivalent to asserting that all the surfaces in the jenga structure are 100.000% flat, smooth, and level, and they would NEVER be able to withstand the slightest gust of wind or other horizontal force, let alone anything equivalent to a jet impact.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by dudly
you must follow all the requirements, not just one.


I looked at them, I don't see how using Jenga block would violate any of the other requirements.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by dudly
 


What a load of bollocks!!

You take this seriously? Anyone who does doesn't understand physics, mass, inertia, momentum...scaling it down isn't a valid comparison...


Here, look, this is what they actually say!


It can be any size!


Utterly moronic, and not worth your time and effort to post. You'd think even high school physics students would see it's ridiculous, in the extreme....

...IF (as I am assuming) this is some sort of attempt to ridicule the tragic events of 9/11.

The depths of depravity and inanity they go to in order to mock is vile and disrespectful --- as are most of the so-called "truth movement:.


What does scaling it down have to do with anything? Its a challenge posed to prove the assertion that the government is claiming.

Instead of becoming focused on ridiculing people who "mock the tragic events", you could win 10,000 euros.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


OK, sounds plausible.

So, scratch my original idea then I guess.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
You take this seriously? Anyone who does doesn't understand physics, mass, inertia, momentum...scaling it down isn't a valid comparison...



Please don't make blanket unsubstantiated statements Weedy. Give us the math on this.

You seem to be saying that experiments done to scale are invalid.

Please give us the math on this Weedy. Don't act just like one of those insufferable truthers. Why is scaling an experiment an invalid procedure?

Where's the math?



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
What a load of bollocks!!

You take this seriously? Anyone who does doesn't understand physics, mass, inertia, momentum...scaling it down isn't a valid comparison...


Actually it could or could not be a valid comparison depending on scale. What you are probably thinking of is the fact that material strengths do not scale linearly with size. For example a 2-foot tall WTC tower made out of steel would have a much higher redundancy factor than the real things, even though they were also made of steel.

BUT it IS possible to scale the material strengths correctly with size, so you have no reason to dismiss this immediately as "bullocks." If the towers were able to collapse like they did, without explosives, then it should be perfectly possible to model the same thing on a smaller scale, without explosives.
Scale models are so common in science today that I'm surprised that you would be so quick to believe they must be useless when it comes to 9/11. I can tell you must have just knee-jerked this response out on the fly. Still a bit touchy about all of this aren't you!




It can be any size!


Utterly moronic, and not worth your time and effort to post. You'd think even high school physics students would see it's ridiculous, in the extreme....


I would be delighted if you could post and explain in detail the technical problems that make relevant scale models of the collapses an impossibility. I assume that's what you are trying to insinuate, though "not worth your time" and "You'd think even high school physics students..." are pretty damned vague technical criticisms, for someone who is pretending to give a technical criticism. Lots of very sensational language, though.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by VirginiaRisesYetAgain]



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Hurry up Weedy. I am waiting for you to overturn 99% of all lab work done in the history of science.


[edit on 20-7-2010 by ipsedixit]



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


100% of the experts that have used models in their work, cited in your 99% of this lab work that you said, believe 0% of truther lies. Why is this?

Hint: They know the the effects of scaling.

For instance: a 1 pound toy car crashing into another 1 pound car at 1 MPH. Compare this to a 100 pound car crashing into another 100 pound car at 100 MPH.

It's going to differ, no? PROPER scaling is not irrelevant.



[edit on 20-7-2010 by Whyhi]



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
As has already been pointed out, if weedy says its rubbish, he should be able to show this is the case and "easily" claim the 10,000 Euro's(US$12,896)....

I am willing to bet $1000US that weedy wont claim the $$$ because he cannot do so, even with his fancy words and rebuttals.

Scale models are used ALL the time in Structural Design and Architecture....

Being a "pilot" he should also know scale models are used in wind tunnels to gauge aerodynamics and drag co-efficiencies....

Unfortunately weedy is not able to use explosives in his scale model, so he and no-one else stands a hope in hell of claiming the $$$$...

Is that perhaps what weedy meant when he said "what a load of bollocks..."??

Again, for the umpteenth time, more evidence that the Official Story is a one big lie....

Incidentally, I liked weedy's statement "The depths of depravity and inanity they go to in order to mock is vile and disrespectful --- as are most of the so-called "truth movement:. "

Playing the emotive card again weedy, as a substitute for scientific evidence ??

Priceless..


Or at least 10,000 Euro's worth....



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by benoni
 


How about the guy promoting the challenge uses his money to build a proper model, with at least several different independent experts to ensure it's scaled and built properly to that of a model of the WTC would be, and then prove the world wrong?

Oh wait, he can't, he'd argue that the actual experts helping him don't know what they're doing or some ludicrous explanation.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Heiwa is insane:

1-He's a no planer at WTC
forums.randi.org...
You have not read properly. As the plane impact is a fake, the jet fuel cannot have been arriving with the plane at 500 mph

2-no planer at the Pentagon
forums.randi.org...
No plane full of jet fuel hitting pentagon from outside.

3-No plane anywhere, including Shanksville
forums.randi.org...
at WTC 1,2,7 and pentagon and no planes. Same at Shanksville but no CD ... and no plane, of course. Keep it simple.

4-agreess that if you drop the upper part onto the lower part from a height of 2 miles, little damage is done.
forums.randi.org...
Pomeroo-If I magically lift the 110th floor two miles above the 109th and drop it, a "new equilibrium" is quickly reached and no damage is done, right? Crush-up equals crush-down, RIGHT? If I drop the top thirty floors on the bottom eighty from a height of two miles, THEY ESTABLISH A "NEW EQUILIBRIUM," RIGHT??????
Heiwa-According Isaac Newton 1687 - yes! Verified several times since.

5- and again
forums.randi.org...
What I said discussing something from a theoretical point of view was:

"No - not really ... even after a two mile drop and a plenty of energy/forces at impact. As the upper part C is smaller (1/10th of A) and can absorb less strain energy than the lower, bigger part A on ground, the upper part C is destroyed completely before part A is totally destroyed. After part C is totally destroyed it does not apply any force on what still remains of part A.

6- says that dropping a 30,000 ton block of ice onto the WTC will not damage it
forums.randi.org...
Drop an ice block of 30 000 tons (same amount of PE) on WTC1 and the steel columns of WTC1 will break the ice and the PE ends up as small ice blocks in the streets of NYC.

7-claims that 7 may have been destroyed by a vacuum
forums.randi.org...
Next question - how to create vacuum at bottom of WTC7? You have removed all personnel and NYFD (not witnesses) evidently. What do you do next? Right - your remove the air! And BLOUFF - the WTC7 is pulled!

8-claims that NIST people don't exist
forums.randi.org...
I have (incl. Sunder) + Comments, etc. They never reply! Confirms my suspicion that they do not exist.

There's more, but you all get the drift.

He is staggeringly incompetent.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Because it is possible to lie with statistics doesn't mean we throw out statistics. Of course it should be scaled properly.

Oops. I forgot. I'm dealing with apologists for the criminal Bush administration. Mr. Björkman and company better have their eye protection on when Weedy's house of cards brings down the table it's sitting on.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Wow, When did basic science become obsolete to finding answers. This is a challenge people, and if there is no one that can find the answer then basic science wins. If it doesnt the win the money, and prove once and for all that the OS is right.



posted on Jul, 20 2010 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Of course it should be scaled properly.


How do you scale gravity?

How do you scale the ke gained from a drop of 1 story to fit the model? Less distance = less time to gather momentum = smaller impact energy = gravity can't be scaled.

This yet another reason truthers fail.

They have no idea just how uneducated they are.....



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join