Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Doesn't show that at all. The fact is there were very few, if any, studded walls built in the office spaces in the towers. You seem to think that every floor (an acre of space) was a honeycomb of studded walls. Not so. Even if there were, such walls would have been crushed like everything else in there. After all, it wasn't just a floor slab that collapsed on the floors below.



This is true, however, the forces on the two objects are equal in magnitude. While the forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction, the accelerations of the objects are not necessarily equal in magnitude. In accord with Newton's second law of motion, the acceleration of an object is dependent upon both force and mass. Thus, if the colliding objects have unequal mass, they will have unequal accelerations as a result of the contact force that results during the collision.

For example, a 4000 lb car traveling at 60mph hits a 100 lb deer standing in the road. In this collision, there is an equal and opposite REACTION, but obviously the two objects are not equal in mass or acceleration. Therefore, the deer gets the worst of it. Or, the 4000 lb car traveling at 60mph hits a .05 ounce bug flying at 2mph in the opposite direction. In this collision, there is an equal and opposite reaction, however the two objects are not equal in mass or acceleration. Therefore the bug gets CRUSHED and is ACCELERATED in the opposite direction.

Similarly, when a mass of 135,000 tons collapsing under the force of gravity onto a static mass of 4500 tons, there is an equal and opposite reaction, however the two objects are not of equal mass or acceleration. Therefore, the lesser static mass gets crushed.

It is elementary physics, something an 8th grader would understand.

Your obsession with your explosives theory is psychotic. Obviously you have never possessed any sk**l in logic, reason, and critical thought. And, if you ever had any grasp of the laws of physics (which you don't), in this case, Newton's Laws of Motion, your pathological fixation on your explosives theory has propelled you into a world of science fiction. It simply is not possible to abandon physical laws just so you can rationalize a theory. Things just don't work that way in the real world.

But, let's humor you for a moment. If there had been explosives involved in the collapse of the towers (which there were not), Newton's Laws of Motion would still have applied, the only difference would have been in the acceleration of the masses.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Yes, he is.

payne1000

It's most likely the steel studs used in homebuilding are the very same steel studs used in office buildings.
Can you show evidence that they are not the same?

The impossible theory you borrowed from the liars at NIST never has explained what caused the massive steel center core to collapse downward at great speed.
They can't explain it for the same reason you can't explain it.
It's impossible unless explosives and cutting charges are used.
The animators for a PBS documentary couldn't explain what would cause the center core to fall so they just left it standing in their animation, even though they were supporting the Bush Administration conspiracy theory.

payne1000

Are you a coward who hides behind anonymity in order to lie and insult others on this forum?
The answer is obvious.

emarine

Why would a contractor hired to build basically false walls use more expensive materials?... it didn't support anything but itself... most contractors are bidding on jobs & cost plays a huge part ... have you not the least bit of common sense putz?... the NIST are very familiar with the laws of motion where you still are basically clueless ... the center core was only .250 thick up high in the beam walls which is light weight... the massive weight once in motion simply ripped the top sections apart... down lower over 600' still stood where it was thicker & stronger until after the main collapse as seen in video when it fell last... there were no chemical explosives involved in the towers collapse...they simply were not necessary putz...

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Irrelevant. What we need from you is irrefutable evidence that steel studded walls honeycombed all the office floors in the towers. If you cannot show proof that such a massive addition of weight, mass and space stealing walls were constructed in the tower office spaces, then your entire argument is irrelevant.

"Great speed"? WTF are you talking about? The steel core along with every thing else collapsed under the pull of gravity--32ft/sec/sec.

On this thread alone, this has been explained a hundred times, clearly, unambiguously, with all data available, and with the laws of physics applied without the conspiratorial butchering, manipulations, and impossible scenarios fomented by "architects and engineers" who sold their souls to the devil.

Obviously, it was possible without the use of explosives and cutting charges.

What exactly is the "Bush Administration conspiracy theory"?

The scientists at Purdue University, the U of WI, the U of Hawaii and several independent engineering and scientific institutions have all done some very advanced and sophisticated computer simulations of the the entire event in the twin towers--from aircraft impact, the fires, and the collapses. All of the simulations were based on all available physical and visual evidence, and showed quite clearly the complex dynamics of the destruction of the towers WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION OF EXPLOSIVES WHATSOEVER.

payne1000

[quote=Blade_Runner]

payne1000 wrote:
My cardboard wall and concrete block experiment shows that the interior walls would have stopped the floor slabs from collapsing on one another.
Doesn't show that at all. The fact is there were very few, if any, studded walls built in the office spaces in the towers. You seem to think that every floor (an acre of space) was a honeycomb of studded walls. Not so. Even if there were, such walls would have been crushed like everything else in there. After all, it wasn't just a floor slab that collapsed on the floors below.
You show no source for your claim that there were few floors with stud walls in the Twin Towers. Do you expect readers to believe you, an anonymous source, who doesn't source his claims?


payne}Newton's third law states that [i wrote:
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. The statement means that in every interaction, there is a pair of forces acting on the two interacting objects. The size of the forces on the first object equals the size of the force on the second object.[/i]

This is true, however, the forces on the two objects are equal in magnitude. While the forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction, the accelerations of the objects are not necessarily equal in magnitude. In accord with Newton's second law of motion, the acceleration of an object is dependent upon both force and mass. Thus, if the colliding objects have unequal mass, they will have unequal accelerations as a result of the contact force that results during the collision. Small random fires burning for a short time could not have weakened any of the steel in the towers. So there was no force which could have caused the steel column structure of the towers to collapse in the first place.

For example, a 4000 lb car traveling at 60mph hits a 100 lb deer standing in the road. In this collision, there is an equal and opposite REACTION, but obviously the two objects are not equal in mass or acceleration. Therefore, the deer gets the worst of it. Or, the 4000 lb car traveling at 60mph hits a .05 ounce bug flying at 2mph in the opposite direction. In this collision, there is an equal and opposite reaction, however the two objects are not equal in mass or acceleration. Therefore the bug gets CRUSHED and is ACCELERATED in the opposite direction.

Similarly, when a mass of 135,000 tons collapsing under the force of gravity onto a static mass of 4500 tons, there is an equal and opposite reaction, however the two objects are not of equal mass or acceleration. Therefore, the lesser static mass gets crushed. Each floor of the towers weighed 4,545 tons. The 20 floors which fell on the North Tower would weigh 91,000 tons. The mass they fell on weighed 409,000 tons, not 4500 tons. All those 90 floors were solidly connected. Trying to say they were separate entities is a total lie. Since you hide behind cowardly anonymity, there is no limit to the lies you are willing to post.

It is elementary physics, something an 8th grader would understand.

payne wrote:
In the action of the collapsing towers, the equal and opposite reaction was missing from the fall of all three towers. All the resistance which made up the equal and opposite reaction from the undamaged lower floors was removed by explosives. The towers fell at the speed the explosives were sequenced traveling down the towers.
Your obsession with your explosives theory is psychotic. Obviously you have never possessed any sk**l in logic, reason, and critical thought. And, if you ever had any grasp of the laws of physics (which you don't), in this case, Newton's Laws of Motion, your pathological fixation on your explosives theory has propelled you into a world of science fiction. It simply is not possible to abandon physical laws just so you can rationalize a theory. Things just don't work that way in the real world.

But, let's humor you for a moment. If there had been explosives involved in the collapse of the towers (which there were not), Newton's Laws of Motion would still have applied, the only difference would have been in the acceleration of the masses. In the case of all three towers, they fell just like controlled demolitions. These eyewitnesses recognized that fact and described it accurately. https://youtu.be/VwjRaadx-QU

payne1000

But this photo and all the videos show explosions. And the eyewitnesses heard explosions.
And the hundred-year history of skyscraper fires indicate fires cannot bring a skyscraper down at any speed.
https://youtu.be/VwjRaadx-QU

payne1000

I see you've returned to your original location In the Valley of Elah.
That's a proper place for a Z*****t shill to reside.

I've shown you the Bush Administration Conspiracy Theory many times. Since your memory is so limited, here it is again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98

How do you explain the computer animation done by PBS animators for a documentary supporting the Bush Administration conspiracy theory?
They couldn't figure out what would take down the massive center core so they just left it standing.

emarine

[quote=payne1000]


partition walls in office space's only requires a 24" frame center... I wonder why putz...


Steel framed walls can be designed to offer excellent thermal and acoustic properties - one of the specific considerations when building using cold formed steel is that thermal bridging can occur across the wall system between the outside environment and interior conditioned space. Thermal bridging can be protected against by installing a layer of externally fixed insulation along the steel framing - typically referred to as a 'thermal break'.
The spacing between studs is typically 16 inches on center for homes exterior and interior walls depending on designed loading requirements. In office suites the spacing is 24 inches on center for all walls except for elevator and stair case wells...

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

I will cut BladeRunner some slack. He and his bros, are of limited intellect.
They are still locked onto this scenario:
Everything all Americans should know about 911 in under 5 minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=A_IZaUuK_d0

Then they have no option, but to ignore the topic of this thread; 'Who Is Really Responsible For The Chemical Attack In Syria?
They have to ignore MOTIVES.
The Syrian War What You're Not Being Told
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkamZg68jpk

The road to WWIII by StormClowdsGathering.com
What's really going on in Syria? Let's look at the evidence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4

payne1000

It appears you are attempting to mislead once again.
The photos below show steel studs on 16" centers.
I doubt if the tenants in the Twin Towers would be so cheap as to accept 24" centers.

emarine

I doubt the tenants would know the difference... I didn't make the code... partition walls are basically f**e so why not increase the center?... makes sense to me... you post lot's of pictures with no value... office buildings usually don't have large roll up doors like auto shops do putz...

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

You show no source for your claim that there were few floors with stud walls in the Twin Towers. Do you expect readers to believe you, an anonymous source, who doesn't source his claims?
I know from the hundreds of photos I've seen of the offices in the towers that the bulk of office spaces were tailored to the individual tenant's specs. The vast majority of the tenants used free standing dividers, cubicles, and in some cases no dividers at all--just desks, cabinets and so on. Some tenants opted for an enclosed office, but this was located on a very small area of the overall rented space. In any case, the towers were not designed to accommodate a mass of permanent framed walls in the office spaces. Such walls would add considerable weight to the floor systems, they would reduce available space by a significant percentage, they would have required extensive additional electrical wiring for lighting the offices, and they would hinder the fast paced communications between the various departments in any given business--the majority of which were in world finance. In any case, the construction of studded walls in the office spaces would have made no difference whatsoever, they would have been destroyed just like everything else.

Small random fires burning for a short time could not have weakened any of the steel in the towers. So there was no force which could have caused the steel column structure of the towers to collapse in the first place.
It has been apparent all along that you are not dealing with reality in making such an i***tic statement. Any person with even average intelligence and a modicum of common sense, whose peceptions are not polluted with pre-conceived ideas and fantasy concepts, whose ability to reason objectively and can apply logic and critical thought, even at an elementary level, and particularly who is not under the oppressive influences of blind h**e and paranoia, can see that the fires in the towers were neither small nor random.

The ability to assess an uncontrolled fire situation is fundamental in the fire service, and there is not a firefighter worth his salt who would even suggest that the fires in the towers were "small or random". I have read the FDNY after action report in its entirety, a report that included a detailed "size up" of the fire involvement from start to finish, and there is no question about the size and extent of the fires in the towers. Based on my 20 years experience in firefighting, just by watching the videos, I can see that FDNY faced a massive fire situation that they knew almost from the outset would be impossible to contain. This is why the FDNY commanders rather quickly changed the mission to rescue rather than fire suppression. So, I will ignore your stupidity and take my cues from my own experience and the men who had to deal directly with the 9/11 tragedy.

Moreover, there is no need for you to once again make another lame attempt to use the words of a dead firefighter who made it to the 78th floor in the South Tower in to justify your ignorance. Battalion Chief Palmer was in a situation where he could never have known or seen what was happening above him. He was exhausted, high on adrenaline, highly stressed, and in a very difficult situation. It is a fact that when a firefighter is inside a burning building, full of smoke and heat and flame, his view of the world is restricted to sometimes the length of his arm.

I have read the transcripts of the radio communications Palmer had with others, and his particular circumstance was discussed in the FDNY after action report--the most important aspect of that was the massive communcation problems the first responders were dealing with.

Each floor of the towers weighed 4,545 tons. The 20 floors which fell on the North Tower would weigh 91,000 tons. The mass they fell on weighed 409,000 tons, not 4500 tons. All those 90 floors were solidly connected. Trying to say they were separate entities is a total lie. Since you hide behind cowardly anonymity, there is no limit to the lies you are willing to post.
OK, 91,000 tons of MASS IN MOTION DID NOT collapse instantaneously onto 409,000 tons of MASS AT REST. The key word here is PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE, IOW, the 91,000 ton mass took out one floor (4545 tons) at a time on its way down. The open area between the floors was approximately 16 feet, only the floor attachment to the perimeter and the core held them apart, so the collapsing mass destroyed the vertical support, fell 16 feet, then smashed into the next floor below.

In the case of all three towers, they fell just like controlled demolitions. These eyewitnesses recognized that fact and described it accurately. "Just like" doesn't cut it. Nor are eyewitness statements reliable.

I see you've returned to your original location In the Valley of Elah.
That's a proper place for a Z*****t shill to reside.
Except that I am not in the Valley of Elah, I am in the United States. I just put that location back up to bait you. Looks like it is working.

How do you explain the computer animation done by PBS animators for a documentary supporting the Bush Administration conspiracy theory?
They couldn't figure out what would take down the massive center core so they just left it standing.Of course PBS couldn't figure out what would take down the massive center core. PBS doesn't employ scientists and engineers to do their simulations, but they do have a few computer geeks that can screw around with CADs and other graphic software. PBS probably couldn't simulate taking a healthy s**t.

OTH, Purdue university scientists developed a very sophisticated computer simulation program specifically for the purpose of simulating the 9/11 event. They ran every simulation possible--aircraft impact with and without fuel explosions, fire progressions, and collapse initiation and propagation. Interesting how many unexpected violent and quite explosive events can occur in the world without the use of explosives.

If I were an old geezer like yourself, I'd do some serious and brutally honest soul searching to find out why my belief system was so entirely f*cked up.

Here are some sample photos of offices in the twin towers.

payne1000

The top photo has no roll-up door. It does have floor trusses and floor slabs similar to the twin towers. This is the type wall which would have been around the elevator core, which would have given even more strength to the center core.
The second photo shows that some of the interior walls of the Towers were even stronger than steel-studded drywall.