It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Outside energy had to be introduced for the twin towers to collapse the way they did

page: 60
34
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:14 PM

Originally posted by piles

i'm surprised that on a truther forum, the truthers are on the defence

come on truthers your hurting a true truthers reputation here, do it for all us truthers out there...

tbh im surprised anybody believes ten years on that anybody but america did it..

if i assume that one floor collapsed on the 80th floor as a result of the plane hitting, and 30 floors above fell as a result, then i would assume that the building would buckle. which then would lead to the building partial collapse..

i assuming but sounds more like what would happen to me..

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Go to the link for live physics

values are drop 3.6 mtr mass for just one slab 700,000 kg using the approx distance to shear through the angle seats the trusses rested on 0.05 for the distance travelled in mtrs put the figs in divide the answer given in newtons by 10000 as its 10 kilo newtons in a ton and have a look at the value.

THAT answer is for ONE floorslab of mass, 15 fell on North Tower 30 on the South plus of course all the steelwork which would have added to the mass!!!

The answer you get is the reason why ANOK AND PSIK AVOID THE QUESTION AT ALL COSTS!!!

edit on 2-11-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:25 PM

Originally posted by wmd_2008
The answer you get is the reason why ANOK AND PSIK AVOID THE QUESTION AT ALL COSTS!!!

What question?

The fact that when you consider only impact forces, you are ignoring equal opposite reaction law?

The fact that any impact forces would be felt equally by both falling and impacting floors?

You are the one ignoring the laws of motion that applies to ALL colliding objects, with no exceptions.

4i. When a moving object collides with a stationary object of identical mass, the stationary object encounters the greater collision force.

Answer...FALSE - In any collision, the colliding objects exert equal and opposite forces upon each other as the result of the collision interaction. There are no exceptions to this rule.

www.physicsclassroom.com...

There is no question to avoid because your question is bogus...

edit on 11/2/2011 by ANOK because: typo

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:34 PM

You are the one ignoring the conservation of matter law.

Momentum and kinetic energy of building = 0.00 Prove me wrong.

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:37 PM

Originally posted by ANOK

What question?

how about me wrecking your world after you said when the floor slabs heated up they EXPANDED countering any sag and I wrote my steel+concrete+heat=sag equation and you never got back to me on that? The fact the core was still standing after the initial collapse destroying your 15v95 theory? That question? how many questions are you ignoring? where's yer fysicks now Mr Smart Guy?

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:39 PM

Originally posted by ANOK

There is no question to avoid

You should avoid this one

Please tell us Voodoo Physicist If the buildings momentum was NOT 0.000 and its kinetic energy was NOT 0.000

Then what was the buildings momentum P=M x V ___?___ (please fill in the blank)

And what was the buildings kinetic energy KE=1/2 x M x V^2 ___?___ (please fill in the blank)

And how does having 0.000 momentum and 0.000 kinetic energy cancel out the equal opposite reaction law.

The math on this one is real easy. Give it a try.

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:43 PM

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by wmd_2008
The answer you get is the reason why ANOK AND PSIK AVOID THE QUESTION AT ALL COSTS!!!

What question?

The fact that when you consider only impact forces, you are ignoring equal opposite reaction law?

The fact that any impact forces would be felt equally by both falling and impacting floors?

You are the one ignoring the laws of motion that applies to ALL colliding objects, with no exceptions.

4i. When a moving object collides with a stationary object of identical mass, the stationary object encounters the greater collision force.

Answer...FALSE - In any collision, the colliding objects exert equal and opposite forces upon each other as the result of the collision interaction. There are no exceptions to this rule.

www.physicsclassroom.com...

There is no question to avoid because your question is bogus...

edit on 11/2/2011 by ANOK because: typo

NO I am NOT read any physics sites re impact loads and how they are calculated the you can stfu like psik and his steel distribution.

The impact forces generated are the ANSWER to your question, have you put in the figs? I take it you have and probably S**T YOURSELF AT THE ANSWER!

When the impact force starts to build both parts will feel it BUT when the load exceeds the ULTIMATE load the connections can take BANG failure that mass DUE to gravity starts to fall and joins the rest of the falling mass!

OH what about the office on the 95th floor QUESTION I take it you will ignore that again as you haven't a clue what you are talking about!
edit on 2-11-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:53 PM
Ok I'm getting lost here. Who all is in line here waiting on an answer from Anock ? Whats the Order ? Who goes first ? Am I next in line ? Do I need To take a number and have a seat ?

I'm sorry if I jumped line I'll wait my turn. Sorry.

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 08:00 PM
ANOK
Member was on ATS
5 minutes ago.

Sorry folks. Anok has left the building.
edit on 2-11-2011 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 08:34 PM

Originally posted by waypastvne
Ok I'm getting lost here. Who all is in line here waiting on an answer from Anock ? Whats the Order ? Who goes first ? Am I next in line ? Do I need To take a number and have a seat ?

I'm sorry if I jumped line I'll wait my turn. Sorry.

You are well down the list ! so take your number and await your turn, his head will have exploded at the impact result and the force is large enough to shatter that little bubble him and psik live in!

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 08:48 PM
Key-Rist! 60 pages! This is incredible. I don't have time to read this much "stuff". Did anyone, just to cut to the chase here, did anyone think that the "outside energy source" might be HAARP type energy?

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 09:01 PM

Maybe we should combine our questions into one post by copy pasting them in the proper order. That way we will know who's next, and keep track of the simple questions ANOK can't answer.

Her's mine.

waypastvne
Please tell us Voodoo Physicist If the buildings momentum was NOT 0.000 and its kinetic energy was NOT 0.000

Then what was the buildings momentum P=M x V ___?___ (please fill in the blank)

And what was the buildings kinetic energy KE=1/2 x M x V^2 ___?___ (please fill in the blank)

And how does having 0.000 momentum and 0.000 kinetic energy cancel out the equal opposite reaction law.

If the blanks are not filled the question is not answered.

Quote/Copy paste the question portion of this post and place it in order on yours. Be honest no jumping line.

This is worse than the DMV.

edit on 2-11-2011 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 09:06 PM

Originally posted by Electrum
Key-Rist! 60 pages! This is incredible. I don't have time to read this much "stuff". Did anyone, just to cut to the chase here, did anyone think that the "outside energy source" might be HAARP type energy?

No. This thread proves they had 8.4 Kilotons of explosives in each building. It's a proven truther fact.

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 12:04 AM

I'm compiling a list of links for my signature: obvious "Truth science" errors corrected, and Unanswered questions. I'll add your question to the list.

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 03:12 AM
Hi ALL

Here is an example of impact physics.
A CAR CRASH
This link lets you calculate the impact force of a car crash.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

Now this should be impossible to do according to ANOK as we dont know the mass
of the tree

It would also be impossible according to psik becuase we dont know the (distribution
of the steelwork in the tree) only joking sorry the strength/resistance of the tree.
Now these guys try to make themselves out as some kind of physics whizz kids
mainly because one keeps preaching about the laws of motion and what he thinks
is a simple 2 mass equation.
The other who made a model which he CANT provide proper data for to explain the
items used or how the represent the CORRECT LOADS/FORCES of the 9/11 event.

A little bit of info for everyone
READ THIS ANOK AND PSIK YOU MAY ACTUALLY LEARN SOMETHING

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

You see we dont NEED what you think to calculate the impact force EVEN using the mass of ONE floorslab of the 15 that fell on the N Tower we can see the massive load that would be generated MANY MANY times the static load and WAY above any FOS that would have been applied to the connections.

edit on 3-11-2011 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 03:17 AM

Originally posted by waypastvne
Please tell us Voodoo Physicist If the buildings momentum was NOT 0.000 and its kinetic energy was NOT 0.000

Then what was the buildings momentum P=M x V ___?___ (please fill in the blank)

And what was the buildings kinetic energy KE=1/2 x M x V^2 ___?___ (please fill in the blank)

And how does having 0.000 momentum and 0.000 kinetic energy cancel out the equal opposite reaction law.

If the blanks are not filled the question is not answered.

These questions are ridiculous. They in no way disprove what has already been proven by the facts.

I post the evidence of what I say, and you ignore it. Are those websites I post links to lying?

You are right they had zero momentum, and zero Ke, but what you keep failing to realise, and what has to be repeated nonstop, is that when two objects collide the forces on each object is EQUAL, regardless of velocity. Something I have shown to you in a myriad of different ways. There is no canceling out of anything. The answers to your questions doesn't change that.

In a collision between object 1 and object 2, the force exerted on object 1 (F1) is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the force exerted on object 2 (F2). In equation form:

F1 = - F2

The above statement is simply an application of Newton's third law of motion to the collision between objects 1 and 2. Now in any given interaction, the forces which are exerted upon an object act for the same amount of time. You can't contact another object and not be contacted yourself (by that object). And the duration of time during which you contact the object is the same as the duration of time during which that object contacts you. Touch a wall for 2.0 seconds, and the wall touches you for 2.0 seconds. Such a contact interaction is mutual; you touch the wall and the wall touches you. It's a two-way interaction - a mutual interaction; not a one-way interaction. Thus, it is simply logical to state that in a collision between object 1 and object 2, the time during which the force acts upon object 1 (t1) is equal to the time during which the force acts upon object 2 (t2). In equation form:

t1 = t2

The basis for the above statement is simply logic. Now we have two equations which relate the forces exerted upon individual objects involved in a collision and the times over which these forces occur. It is accepted mathematical logic to state the following:

If A = - B

and C = D

then A • C = - B • D

The above logic is fundamental to mathematics and can be used here to analyze our collision.

If F1 = - F2

and t1 = t2

then F1 • t1 = - F2 • t2

The above equation states that in a collision between object 1 and object 2, the impulse experienced by object 1 (F1 • t1) is equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to the impulse experienced by object 2 (F2 • t2).

www.physicsclassroom.com...

edit on 11/3/2011 by ANOK because: typo

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 03:27 AM

That's great, but it's only calculating the force on the car. Not what the car hits. Forces always come in pairs, and it's that pair we're interested in, not just the impacting object.

You need something that shows what happens when two masses collide, and the effect on EACH object, in order to understand that the forces on each colliding object is the same, which seems to be the fact you are denying, or simply ignorant of.

This will show you what happens to both objects in a collision...

www.fearofphysics.com...

Forces always come in pairs - known as "action-reaction force pairs."

www.physicsclassroom.com...

edit on 11/3/2011 by ANOK because: typo

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 03:37 AM

Originally posted by wmd_2008
A little bit of info for everyone
READ THIS ANOK AND PSIK YOU MAY ACTUALLY LEARN SOMETHING

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

Nope sorry, not something I don't already understand.

That site just shows the energy of a falling mass, not what happens when that mass hits a larger mass, or what happens to that larger mass. You will find it though on that same site, here...

Newton's third law: All forces in the universe occur in equal but oppositely directed pairs. There are no isolated forces; for every external force that acts on an object there is a force of equal magnitude but opposite direction which acts back on the object which exerted that external force.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

Now apply that along with your forces.

This will show you what happens to both objects in a two object collision, give it a try...

www.fearofphysics.com...

edit on 11/3/2011 by ANOK because: typo

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 05:39 AM

No you don't understand this is not a simple two mass collision its a whole series of them that's why I asked you the question about an office on the 95 floor.

Can you tell everyone when a load was placed on a floorslab what resisted the force of the load pushing on the slab can you give an honest answer?

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 10:04 AM

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Hi ALL

Here is an example of impact physics.
A CAR CRASH
This link lets you calculate the impact force of a car crash.

hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

Now this should be impossible to do according to ANOK as we dont know the mass
of the tree

It would also be impossible according to psik becuase we dont know the (distribution
of the steelwork in the tree) only joking sorry the strength/resistance of the tree.
Now these guys try to make themselves out as some kind of physics whizz kids
mainly because one keeps preaching about the laws of motion and what he thinks
is a simple 2 mass equation.

Your link is of a SINGLE COLLISION and assumes the tree does not move.

Suppose the problem consisted of 20 smaller trees in a row and car completely breaks the first tree loose from the ground. What will be the force applied to the second tree? Oh damn, you don't know the mass of the first tree. How much did the car slow down? What about the force at the third tree and the fourth? Does it stop at the 7th tree?

Unless you have data on every tree how can you figure out what will happen?

Oh yeah, oversimplify the problem on the basis of STUPID ASSUMPTIONS and then assume you are INTELLIGENT.

We are talking about 15 levels impacting 90+ levels. How much energy is absorbed when the first two levels impact? How much does that slow the falling mass?

Build a physical model that can be completely collapsed by its top 15% or less by height and weight.

I want to see it.

psik
edit on 3-11-2011 by psikeyhackr because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 10:29 AM

Unless you have data on every tree how can you figure out what will happen?

There's your problem, you're confusing what is required to predict behavior with what is needed to analyze an event that has already taken place.

In your little expample, lets say the car hits the trees and knocks down 3 of the twenty. If you know anything about the car and its velocity you can at least estimate a possible range of dimensions for the trees and then check that against what is known about the forest in the area.

edit on 3-11-2011 by hooper because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

34