Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who Says There Is No MA Angle On 9/11?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    I am tapping I'm afraid. You win.

    O.K. you don't win. Its just that I have spent literally a long time thinking and many hours of time arguing this stuff on t'internet. Crazy people want to interpret the IMMUTABLE Laws of Physics to suit their particular interpretation or theory and yet they don't understand that the Laws which govern the universe are the ultimate truth. Look, fair enough you doubt that the twin towers fell in the way that mainstream science claims they did.

    But the equations and an eyewitness views of what happened are eminently available, what do you propose?, Voodoo, Magic, False flag or just that the available data has been fed through computers and found to co-relate with the known facts?.
    Last edited by ReverendClog; 3/06/2010 6:42pm, . Reason: idiocy.

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by ReverendClog View Post
      I am tapping I'm afraid. You win.

      O.K. you don't win. Its just that I have spent literally a long time thinking and many hours of time arguing this stuff on t'internet. Crazy people want to interpret the IMMUTABLE Laws of Physics to suit their particular interpretation or theory and yet they don't understand that the Laws which govern the universe are the ultimate truth. Look, fair enough you doubt that the twin towers fell in the way that mainstream science claims they did.

      But the equations and an eyewitness views of what happened are eminently available, what do you propose?, Voodoo, Magic, False flag or just that the available data has been fed through computers and found to co-relate with the known facts?.
      Of course it's your right, but I wish you wouldn't. Especially if you're doing it because you think I 'm a "crazy person who doesn't understand the laws of Physics, and the conclusions of mainstream science." I understand the laws of physics just fine, and I am a "mainstream" scientist.

      I am not talking about Voodoo, Magic or false flag operations. And if you had read the NIST report, you would know that their computer analysis only pertains to collapse initiation, and says has nothing at all to say about collapse progression (which is what were talking about. 'Member?)

      If you want to quit the field I can't stop you, but don't pretend it's because I don't understand the Mechanics of the problem. Your assumption that I am ignorant of physics, PDE's, or the research that has been done by the government of the tower collapse events is unfounded. Quit if you like, but before you go, I'd like to challenge you to academic Gong Sau.

      Solve this, genius:

      A 1 Kg rigid mass traveling at 10 m/s collides with a stationary 1 Kg rigid mass.

      We assume a perfectly inelastic collision, so following the impact, the masses travel at the same velocity.

      As momentum is conserved...

      Pre-impact momentum (1*10+1*0) = Post-impact momentum (2*v)

      ...the post-impact velocity is 5 m/s

      The pre-impact KE was (0.5*1*10^2) = 50 J
      The post-impact KE is (0.5*2*5^2) = 25 J

      Both masses are perfectly rigid, and so cannot deform.
      There is no resistance.

      Where did that 25 J go ?
      Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


      KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

      In De Janerio, in blackest night,
      Luta Livre flees the fight,
      Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
      Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!

      Comment


        #48
        Oh christ , ok I'm your huckleberry.
        Is this a Joke?.
        [CODEPre-impact momentum (1*10+1*0) = Post-impact momentum (2*v)

        ...the post-impact velocity is 5 m/s

        The pre-impact KE was (0.5*1*10^2) = 50 J
        The post-impact KE is (0.5*2*5^2) = 25 J
        [/CODE],

        It isn't formal maths or anything I recognise as such,

        A 1 Kg rigid mass traveling at 10 m/s collides with a stationary 1 Kg rigid mass.


        I could google this and parrot an answer, we both know that, I am not a great mathematician. You can't expect a real answer surely.

        BTW, to simply calculate the K.E.,

        Ek=1/2 mvsquared, thus,

        Thus Ek= 1/2.10.10/2,( I don't know offhand how to make my keyboard write math. symbols, sorry).

        Is that right?. Look it's a saturday night, and I have taken time away from getting pissed. I'll try in more detail tommorrow.
        Last edited by ReverendClog; 3/06/2010 10:27pm, . Reason: I din't spell 'christ rightbbnb

        Comment


          #49
          OK. I'll bite...

          By assumption this is an elastic collision. Thus momentum and energy are conserved (by definition)

          let v1 = post velocity of object1
          v2 = post velocity of object2

          Energy of system = (.5*1*10^2) = 50 J
          momentum of system = 1*10 = 10 kgm/s

          by momentum conservation:
          1) v1 +v2 = 10
          by energy conservation
          2) v1^2 + v2^2 = 100

          combining 1 and 2 (and simplifying):

          v1*(2*v1 -20) = 0 (quadratic:2 solutions)

          solution 1: v1 = 0 and thus v2 = 10 (by 1)

          or

          solution2: v1 = 10 and thus v2 = 0 (by 1)

          solution 2 isn't physical for a 1d system

          of course the final energy is 50 J (as it was constrained to be)

          I think the error was assuming that both objects get the same velocity, which defies conservation of energy.


          Sorry if I oversimplified this and completely missed your point.

          Comment


            #50
            Let's get back on track people.

            Originally posted by War Wheel View Post
            I did some reading on progressive collapse in domino systems and confirmed my intuition that domino chains fall at a constant rate. I wondered whether vertical domino chains would also fall at a constant rate, and finally looked at these:
            the towers really seemed to be accelerating at the beginning of the collapse and then reach a max collapse speed.
            BTW could you give us a short and simple introduction to why vertical domino chains fall at a constant rate? Maybe you could give us your source?

            Originally posted by Coach Josh View Post
            Look up terminal velocity.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_velocity

            A free-falling object achieves its terminal velocity when the downward force of gravity (Fg) equals the upward force of drag (Fd). This causes the net force on the object to be zero, resulting in an acceleration of zero.[1]
            Doesn't this consist with what we observed in the collapse clips?
            The collapsing towers accelerated in the beginning of the collapse but then reached a max speed.

            If we can confirm that the buildings accelerated somehow then our next logical step would probably be to figure out why this doesn't work like it would according to the theory of vertical domino chains.

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by War Wheel View Post
              I'd like to challenge you to academic Gong Sau.

              Solve this, genius:

              A 1 Kg rigid mass traveling at 10 m/s collides with a stationary 1 Kg rigid mass.

              We assume a perfectly inelastic collision, so following the impact, the masses travel at the same velocity.

              As momentum is conserved...

              Pre-impact momentum (1*10+1*0) = Post-impact momentum (2*v)

              ...the post-impact velocity is 5 m/s

              The pre-impact KE was (0.5*1*10^2) = 50 J
              The post-impact KE is (0.5*2*5^2) = 25 J

              Both masses are perfectly rigid, and so cannot deform.
              There is no resistance.

              Where did that 25 J go ?
              Badly poised question.

              If you are assuming a perfecly inelastic collision then the extra 25J of energy has been disspated by some vibrational means (heat, friction, sound....) and you would get deformation of one or both of the masses (which you are claiming doesnt happen) coz if you didnt then you wouldnt get any vibration.

              So putting reality aside for a moment,

              m1v1 = (m1+m2)v2

              v2 = m1v1/(m1+m2)

              ke2/ke1 = 0.5(m1+m2)v2^2 / 0.5m1v1^2

              Which boils down to:

              ke2/ke1 = m1/(m1+m2) = 10/20

              ie half the kinetic energy after collision...



              Originally posted by War Wheel View Post
              I understand the laws of physics just fine, and I am a "mainstream" scientist.
              Oh dear!
              Last edited by Da Pope; 3/07/2010 6:57am, .

              Comment


                #52
                Just to make this perfectly clear energy is conserved just not kinetic energy.

                The question is impossible in reality.

                Comment


                  #53
                  Originally posted by Da Pope View Post
                  Badly poised question.

                  If you are assuming a perfecly inelastic collision then the extra 25J of energy has been disspated by some vibrational means (heat, friction, sound....) and you would get deformation of one or both of the masses (which you are claiming doesnt happen) coz if you didnt then you wouldnt get any vibration.

                  So putting reality aside for a moment,

                  m1v1 = (m1+m2)v2

                  v2 = m1v1/(m1+m2)

                  ke2/ke1 = 0.5(m1+m2)v2^2 / 0.5m1v1^2

                  Which boils down to:

                  ke2/ke1 = m1/(m1+m2) = 10/20

                  ie half the kinetic energy after collision...
                  So where did it go?



                  Oh dear!
                  :shock:
                  Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


                  KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

                  In De Janerio, in blackest night,
                  Luta Livre flees the fight,
                  Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
                  Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by Da Pope View Post
                    The question is impossible in reality.
                    Let me get this straight: You're blaming me for the fact that there are no perfectly inelastic collisions in the real world?

                    The missing energy is stored as internal (deformational) states of the (inelastic) objects. :shock: How is that possible?!
                    Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


                    KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

                    In De Janerio, in blackest night,
                    Luta Livre flees the fight,
                    Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
                    Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Well i got trollshidoed for my little comment:

                      "YOu are stoopid and gay if you believe this. The government can't do anything right. You are dumb and crazy for questioning what you are told."

                      Let me just attempt to redeem myself and put into perspective what I was getting at. Someone missed my scarcasm on that comment. I was attempting to mock and address the fact that my scarcastic response of "you're dumb/crazy to believe or question..." is one of the most common replies to the conspiracy theory forum posts.

                      I actually commend War Wheel for is look at 9/11 and the evidence he has brought forward. Am I jumping on the 9/11 hoax bandwagon? no. I just appreciate seeing things from a different angle.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by Uglybugly View Post
                        Let's get back on track people.



                        the towers really seemed to be accelerating at the beginning of the collapse and then reach a max collapse speed.
                        BTW could you give us a short and simple introduction to why vertical domino chains fall at a constant rate? Maybe you could give us your source?
                        Sure, the source is http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.o...4/155.abstract

                        and the argument is essentailly that the rate of collapse in a domino chain will accelerate only until the maximum number of leaning dominos is engaged in initiating each collapse (itself a function of domino spacing) and no further.


                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_velocity



                        Doesn't this consist with what we observed in the collapse clips?
                        The collapsing towers accelerated in the beginning of the collapse but then reached a max speed.

                        If we can confirm that the buildings accelerated somehow then our next logical step would probably be to figure out why this doesn't work like it would according to the theory of vertical domino chains.
                        There is a legitimate question that asks if shifting the domino chain from horizontal to vertical does away with the maximum collapse rate (ie:allows unbounded throughout the collapse). The reason I posted the brick break vids is that they indicate that even vertical collapses of this sort progress at a constant rate.
                        Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


                        KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

                        In De Janerio, in blackest night,
                        Luta Livre flees the fight,
                        Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
                        Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by jspeedy View Post
                          Well i got trollshidoed for my little comment:

                          "YOu are stoopid and gay if you believe this. The government can't do anything right. You are dumb and crazy for questioning what you are told."

                          Let me just attempt to redeem myself and put into perspective what I was getting at. Someone missed my scarcasm on that comment. I was attempting to mock and address the fact that my scarcastic response of "you're dumb/crazy to believe or question..." is one of the most common replies to the conspiracy theory forum posts.

                          I actually commend War Wheel for is look at 9/11 and the evidence he has brought forward. Am I jumping on the 9/11 hoax bandwagon? no. I just appreciate seeing things from a different angle.
                          I got the sarcasm on the second or third read, and I appreciate it. Seeing fellow Bullies resort to Strawman is... disheartening. As CJ demonstrated, simply aligning yourself with "science" is not the same thing as thinking analytically about a problem. As DaPope demonstrated, simply having a technical education does not mean you are automatically correct when the discussion turns technical.

                          Anyone who is actually paying attention knows what I have been trying to discuss here, and knows it has nothing to do with crazy conspiracy theories, and is not motivated by a lack of understanding of the problem.

                          This is fucking Bullshido, people. Strawman, appleal to Authority, appeal to Emotion, etc. just won't cut it here.
                          Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


                          KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

                          In De Janerio, in blackest night,
                          Luta Livre flees the fight,
                          Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
                          Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Update: I did an analysis of the audio track for the 35 brick bread vid, and I can report that there is slight, but measurable acceleration.

                            The Da Popes of the world will tell you that the frame rate of a YT vid is too low to allow a measurement of (say) the rate a bumble bee's wings flap. While that's being said, I'll get out my digital tuner app and see what the frequency of the bee's buzz is. A lot more is solvable than folks would have you believe, if you are creative in gathering your data.
                            Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


                            KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

                            In De Janerio, in blackest night,
                            Luta Livre flees the fight,
                            Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
                            Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by War Wheel View Post
                              The missing energy is stored as internal (deformational) states of the (inelastic) objects. :shock: How is that possible?!
                              Mmm not sure if your being deliberetly obtuse here cos earlier I posted this...

                              Originally posted by Da Pope View Post
                              If you are assuming a perfecly inelastic collision then the extra 25J of energy has been disspated by some vibrational means (heat, friction, sound....) and you would get deformation of one or both of the masses (which you are claiming doesnt happen) coz if you didnt then you wouldnt get any vibration.
                              If your masses are assumed RIGID as you did in your high skool example, then you are assuming that they CANNOT DEFORM. An increase in internal energy IS A FORM OF DEFORMATION. Some of the constitutive parts of your mass will vibrate at a higher frequency (thermodynamics anyone?).

                              As I pointed out the question doesnt make any physical sense. On the one hand you say deformation cannot happen and then later (after it being pointed out in my earleir post) claim it does due to an increase in internal energy.

                              Your intellectual Gong Sau was at best a badly poised high skool example used to teach a concept in a grossly oversimplified way.

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Originally posted by War Wheel View Post
                                Update: I did an analysis of the audio track for the 35 brick bread vid, and I can report that there is slight, but measurable acceleration.

                                The Da Popes of the world will tell you that the frame rate of a YT vid is too low to allow a measurement of (say) the rate a bumble bee's wings flap. While that's being said, I'll get out my digital tuner app and see what the frequency of the bee's buzz is. A lot more is solvable than folks would have you believe, if you are creative in gathering your data.
                                So err you had sensors placed all over the Trades Centre's internal structure?

                                You captured some data on the crack propagation through the structural supports of the buildings?

                                You had some manner of measuring the stress energy at critical structural points in the supporting structures induced by an commercial jet plane hitting it?

                                Or did you deduce all that data from a video camera?

                                :shock:

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X