Oh Goodie! ... More on 911 (inside job) :)

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Keenly

Guest
bin laden certainly was suspect number 1 according the media



according to the FBI there was, and still is, not enough evidence to connect bin laden to the attacks of september 11th

(call them up and ask)
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
Meanwhile, nobody has posted a reasonable answer to a very simple question. If there was a conspiracy, how did the conspirators manage a controlled demolition when such a task requires hundreds of man-hours and major structural work on the building?
Click to expand...
A: the company i work with ran into a deadline at work and we had bid 600 man hours to do the job and only had 4 days to complete. Guess what? We did it. In the Marine Corps we unloaded an aircraft carrier by hand and beat the Navy by 11 hours and they used cranes and lots of trucks. You can do a 1000 man hours of work in 1 hour if you have 1000 men to do the job. If you are motivated and tireless in your duties you can accomplish anything.

B: By Major structural work to what are you referring to?
 
K

Keenly

Guest
RickWhite said:
Quoted because nobody stepped up to the plate the first time. Anyone care to try to answer a real question?
Click to expand...
do i really have to explain this?



your post is you complaining about how we are debating.....rofl
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
Keenly said:
more of that circular logic you were talking about



there is no proof of anything in that entire article

some guy sat down and wrote out words, posted it up on a website called "debunking 9/11"

and you take this to be accurate?

where are the pictures, illustrations, graphs, evidence to back up anything this man, or woman/ stated
Click to expand...
Click the link genius.
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
A: the company i work with ran into a deadline at work and we had bid 600 man hours to do the job and only had 4 days to complete. Guess what? We did it. In the Marine Corps we unloaded an aircraft carrier by hand and beat the Navy by 11 hours and they used cranes and lots of trucks. You can do a 1000 man hours of work in 1 hour if you have 1000 men to do the job. If you are motivated and tireless in your duties you can accomplish anything.

B: By Major structural work to what are you referring to?
Click to expand...
Baaahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

So you think they got 1000 men and gave her the old bum's rush and nobody noticed. Not even the army of security they hired after the first bombing in the early 90s. Gee, was that a conspiracy too?

The major structural work is opening all the walls and drilling the beams in order to insert shape charges. If you don't know this why are you even commenting?
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
Here we have actual calculations that prove that the WTC did not fall at free fall speed. Perhaps someone might want to see if they can find a mistake in these calculations. See, this is called "real proof."

In every photo and every video, you can see columns far out pacing the collapse of the building. Not only are the columns falling faster than the building but they are also falling faster than the debris cloud which is ALSO falling faster than the building. This proves the buildings fell well below free fall speed. That is, unless the beams had a rocket pointed to the ground.
Just look at any video you like and watch the perimeter columns.
Deceptive videos stop the timer of the fall at 10:09 when only the perimeter column hits the ground and not the building itself. If you notice, the building just finishes disappearing behind the debris cloud which is still about 40 stories high.
Below is a more accurate graphic using a paper written by Dr. Frank Greening which can be found at: http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf
The paper takes the transfer of momentum into account. Like a billiard ball being hit by another on a pool table, each floor transferred its momentum to the next as represented below. The more weight, the less resistance each floor gave.
​
The time required to strip off a floor, according to Frank Greening, is a maximum of about 110 milliseconds = 0.110 seconds. It is rather the conservation of momentum that slowed the collapse together with a small additional time for the destruction of each floor.
Below are calculations from a physics blogger...
When I did the calculations, what I got for a thousand feet was about nine seconds- let's see,
d = 1/2at^2
so
t = (2d/a)^1/2
a is 9.8m/s^2 (acceleration of gravity at Earth's surface, according to Wikipedia), [He gives this reference so you can double check him.]
d is 417m (height of the World Trade Center towers, same source)
so
t = (834m/9.8m/s^2)^1/2 = 9.23s
OK, so how fast was it going? Easy enough,
v = at
v = (9.8m/s^2 x 9.23s) = 90.4m/s
So in the following second, it would have fallen about another hundred meters. That's almost a quarter of the height it already fell. And we haven't even made it to eleven seconds yet; it could have fallen more than twice its height in that additional four seconds. If the top fell freely, in 13.23 seconds it would have fallen about two and one-half times as far as it actually did fall in that time. So the collapse was at much less than free-fall rates.

​
Click to expand...
I have better than that, lookeee here, If I threw a grand piano off of the top of one of the towers, it would take 10.4 seconds to hit the ground, how long did WTC take?? OMG its the same numbers you propose, how could this be unless the towers encountered no resistance from the "Supposedly" intact 100 stories below the impact?

From ....http://www.v911t.org/Freefall.php

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Using the known distance across the WTC tower (208 feet) I was able to gauge the screen of this video to scale. Using the step forward feature of my DVD player each step forward is one frame, and it moves forward in time at 24 frames per second, and so I have known distances and known time. This makes it possible to estimate the time and distance traveled by an object between 2 known points. I kept track of the distance by adhering post it notes to my screen.
See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php

In this screen shot I use the video controller to mark the exact spot where the tip of the antenna finally disappears. The starting point shows the antenna already in motion, I had to do that, otherwise the top of the antenna would not show up in the screen capture. Anyone with a DVD player, paint, Dreamweaver, and a way to crop pictures should be able to reproduce this precision analysis of the velocity of the collapse. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif].[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So we can see and measure the time it took for the antenna to move 231 feet with very good precision. We can conclude with great confidence that the WTC tower is falling with at least no resistance, and in fact may be being pulled down by a force in addition to gravity. As you can see in the calculations below an object falling in a vacuum would travel 100.4750 feet in 2.5 seconds. Here we have a descrepency that disagrees with the laws of gravity, the antenna falls 231 feet, and in a vaccum with no resistance it would have fallen 100.4750. [/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]​




[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Calculators will not be functional here you will have to go to the site
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html
[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is a drag, but calculating fall time in atmosphere is much more complicated than in a vacuum, but here we estimate the fall time of an apple based on 3 Coefficients of Drag. Fairly small changes in the CD have a fairly drastic effect on fall time.
CD for a sphere has a huge range from .07 to .5, an apple is not a sphere, so an educated guess is a CD of .7

CD @ .07 dropped from 610 feet = TV of 290.274 ft/sec = fall time of 6.1599 secs
CD @ .5 dropped from _610 feet = TV of 108.61 ft/sec_ = fall time of 7.3043 secs
CD @ .7 dropped from _610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/s ___= fall time of 8.0770 secs

See this video, a study of the fall of WTC 7 http://www.v911t.org/911Clips.php


Apples are not perfect spheres and so without wind tunnel testing one could estimate that .5 is closer to the CD than .07, or if we dropped an apple from 610 feet we could back our way in to the CD with algebra if we could observe the fall time. My guess is that the CD for an apple is more like .7 depending on the apple. Using a of .7 CD dropped from __610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/sec
Conclusion: Call in the Myth Busters [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The original 7 World Trade Center was a 47-story building, designed by Emery Roth & Sons, with a red granite façade. The building was 610 feet (186 m) tall, with a trapezoid-shaped footprint that was 330 ft (101 m) long and 140 ft (43 m) wide.[1][2] Tishman Realty & Construction managed construction of the building, which began in 1984.[1] In March 1987, the building opened, to become the seventh structure of the World Trade Center. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So we see that 345 feet is covered in 5.125, and 375 feet is covered in 5.33 seconds. Below are the calculations of distance covered in freefall in 5.125 and 5.33 seconds.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall at 5.125 secs = ft and Freefall at 5.33 secs. = ft so it is safe to say that WTC 7 dropped at or very near freefall velocity. 422 v 345 (81.75%), is 77 feet more distance traveled. 456 v 375 (82.23%) freefall is 81 ft more distance traveled, so we can see based upon the gain of the % comparison that as the fall continues the building is getting closer to freefall velocity, not further away, in other words resistance is decreasing. WTC 7 is somehow accelerating at an increasing rate. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This object falls 100 Meters (328 ft) in 4.4 seconds very nearly the same rate of fall as the examples above, further evidence of falling with nearly no resistance.
source of the above freefall calculator: http://ww2.unime.it/weblab/mirror/ExplrSci/dswmedia/freefall.htm[/FONT]
​


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]==================================
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
CD chart courtesy of NASA:
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/shaped.html
NASA has neglected to tell us what the frontal area is.

CD for a sphere has a huge range from .07 to .5
CD @ .07 dropped from 610 feet = TV of 290.274 ft/sec = fall time of 6.1599
CD @ .5 dropped from __610 feet = TV of 108.61 ft/sec_ = fall time of 7.3043 secs
CD @ .7 dropped from _610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/s ___= fall time of 8.077 secs
Apples are not perfect spheres and so without wind tunnel testing one could estimate that .5 is closer to the CD of an apple than .07, or if we dropped an apple from 610 feet we could back our way in to the CD with algebra if we could observe the fall time. My guess is that the CD for an apple is more like .7 depending on the apple. Using a of .7 CD @ .7 dropped from __610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/sec
Conclusion: Call in the Myth Busters [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall Of an Apple to Terminal Velocity, and then fall 610 feet (equal to WTC 7)
Weight of Apple .43 Pounds
Size of Apple is 2.75 x 3 inches = 0.0625 sq ft
Drag Coefficient = .5 (worst case aerodynamic for a sphere) Note that an apple is not a sphere
Drag Coefficient = .07 (best aerodynamic case for a sphere)
Source:
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/shaped.html
Terminal Velocity = 290.274 ft per second or 88.4755152 meters per second. Source:
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html

=========================== Using 0.07 CD and 610 Feet ===============[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
At time t = s after being dropped, the apple reaches terminal velocity and stops accelerating.
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , = terminal velocity

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft here shows you would need 1310 ft to accelerate to terminal velocity, so the apple would fall at freefall for 610 feet. which is seconds and never achieve terminal velocity.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]=========================== Using .5 CD and 610 Feet================
After 3.3780 seconds, after travailing a distance of 183.4432 feet the apple reaches terminal velocity, then would travel another 426.5568 ft at108.61 ft/s = 3.9263 + initial time of 3.3780 = 7.3043, total distance of 610 feet

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) states the height of WTC7 as 610ft = 185.928m
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
At time t = s after being dropped, the apple hits terminal velocity
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , TV is achieved at after

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft In the first 3.3780 seconds the apple would travel 183.4432 feet with 426.5568 feet to go @ 108.61 ft/s = 3.9263 secs + initial time of 3.3780 secs = 7.3043 secs
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]=========================== Using .7 CD and 610 Feet================[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, the apple hits terminal velocity
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , terminal velocity

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft In the first 2.8549 seconds the apple would travel 131.0302 feet with 478.9698 feet to go @ 91.792 ft/s = 5.2179 secs + initial time of 2.8594 secs = 8.077 secs [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Alfons v911t

Freefall [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the absence of frictional drag, an object near the surface of the earth will fall with the constant acceleration of gravity g. Position and speed at any time can be calculated from the motion equations. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Illustrated here is the situation where an object is released from rest. It's position and speed can be predicted for any time after that. Since all the quantities are directed downward, that direction is chosen as the positive direction in this case. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft
Enter data in any box and click outside the box. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Above tells how far something would fall in ten seconds.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html
A very handy site for physics calculators

Below is the calculating for how fast something would fall from 417 Meters (the height of the WTC towers)

[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the absence of frictional drag, an object near the surface of the earth will fall with the constant acceleration of gravity g. Position and speed at any time can be calculated from the motion equations. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Illustrated here is the situation where an object is released from rest. It's position and speed can be predicted for any time after that. Since all the quantities are directed downward, that direction is chosen as the positive direction in this case. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft
Enter data in any box and click outside the box. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]You can play with this and other calculators @ the gsu site to prove the WTC towers fell too fast. I put this here on the v911t for referenece to it, and to have it documented in case.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]========== A study of top 15 floors of WTC Tower Fall Time in Atmosphere===============
After 27 seconds, after travailing a distance of 12, 401 feet the top 15 floors of the WTC towers reaches terminal velocity, but we dropped the top 15 floors from 1181 feet, so it never achieves Terminal Velocity, and falls at the rate of free fall. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall time from 1181 ft = 8.5710[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]371800000 lbs(Total Mass of a WTC tower) /110 = 3380000 x 15 = 50700000 lbs (Total Mass of the Top 15 floors)
Mass of the Towers:
http://forum.physorg.com/What-was-the-weight-of-a-WTC-Tower_4299.html
Area Dimension of a WTC Tower is 208.005 ft at base is 43264 sf
Dimension of Towers:
http://en.structurae.de/structures/data/index.cfm?id=s0002118 [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Mass for top 15 floors[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] 50700000 lbs[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cross Section Area [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]43264 sf[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.28[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1181[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]893 ft per second[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Terminal Velocity Calculator at NASA
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft The distance after being dropped is more than 1181 ft. , and will fall at the same rate as freefall
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall
At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of interest here is the fact that atmosphere alone would stop the top 15 Floors from accelerating just from drag, if you dropped it from above 12, 401 feet. This begs the question, how much would it be slowed down if it had to fall through the rest of the WTC tower? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The density of a WTC Tower is 371800000/59185152 = 6.28 lbs per cubic feet
Air density is 0.07 lbs per cubic foot [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The density of the medium that a body falls through has an effect on it's Terminal Velocity.
A body will fall in a liquid slower than it will through a gas, and even slower through something solid. When stuff gets in the way, it slows down the thing moving through it, the more stuff in the way, the slower the body goes, if it is not stopped entirely. A bullet goes through the air faster than it goes through a 10 foot thick brick wall, when you move something it takes work/energy to do it. In the case of things falling, we know exactly what that quanity of energy is. This refutes the "pancake theory" in a solid and provable way, based on the bedrocks of Newtonian physics. Things fall slower when they fall through denser medium.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]========== A study of Grand Piano Fall Time in Atmosphere===============
After 4 seconds, after travailing a distance of 257 feet the Grand Piano reaches terminal velocity, then falls 1111 at feet at 128.61 ft/s = 8.63 secs. + initial time of 4 seconds = 12.63 seconds total fall time from 1368 feet.
At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , Terminal Velocity

The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html

[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Mass of Grand Piano[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]285 kg = 628.317 lb[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cross Section Area [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]25.8215261675 sf[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.28[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1368 ft. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]128.615 ft per second[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] The beautiful new GC1 combines the duplex scaling and rich tonal character of the coveted C1 grand with cost-saving advantages in materials and production to create an instrument that's both expressive and uncommonly affordable.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Grand Piano Specifications:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Length: 161cm (5'3")[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Width: 149cm –[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Height: 101cm[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Weight: 285k[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Finished in Black Polyester
161 x 149 = 23989 sq cm[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://www.pianoplus.co.uk/yamaha-piano/grands.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Piano Mass and dimensions in english and metric:
285 kg = 628.317 lb
161 cm = 5.28215 ft
149 cm = 4.88845 ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4.88845 x 5.28215 = 25.8215261675 sq. ft. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Dropped From 1368 feet[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient = 1.28 (Flat Object CD 1.28
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/shaped.html
Altitude = 417 meters = 1368 ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]TV = 128.615[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But those are the outside dimensions of the piano, pianos are not rectangular, but more like a right triangle, shaped in the most economical way to encase the stings. So they actual surface area could be more like 13 sf. rather than almost 26 sf. Then Terminal Velocity would be 181.889 ft/sec
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Example of the shape of a Piano: http://www.strand7.com/html/pianopaper.htm[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
After 5.65 seconds, after travailing a distance of 514.48 feet the Grand Piano reaches terminal velocity, then falls 853.52 at feet at 181.889 ft/sec = 4.69 secs. + initial time of 5.65 seconds = 10.34 seconds total fall time from 1368 feet.

At time t = s after being dropped,
the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s ,
The distance from the starting point will be
y = m= ft [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Mass of Grand Piano[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]285 kg = 628.317 lb[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cross Section Area [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]16 sf[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.28[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1368 ft. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]181.889 ft/sec[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
So the fall time would likely be between 10.34 seconds and 12.63 seconds, depending on the shape, and the attitude the piano assumes as it falls.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT]
Beat that!
 
K

Keenly

Guest
RickWhite said:
You have not made a single intelligent comment in this entire thread. Why don't you just go away.
Click to expand...
i laugh at your useless attempt to discredit everything i have said



according to the rep i have received in the last 48 or so hours, a lot of people agree with what i have to say in this thread


so why dont we do something interesting here


RickWhite, You have not made a single intelligent comment in this entire thread. Why don't you just go away.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
Baaahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

So you think they got 1000 men and gave her the old bum's rush and nobody noticed. Not even the army of security they hired after the first bombing in the early 90s. Gee, was that a conspiracy too?

The major structural work is opening all the walls and drilling the beams in order to insert shape charges. If you don't know this why are you even commenting?
Click to expand...

You don't drill steel beams, you would drill reinforced concrete beams. You do realize these buildings are not made of concrete right? Or are you still lost on this?

No one says they used shaped charges ( They don't they use det cord), we are saying NANO THERMITE was used to cut the beams. You are having a hard time following all this ?
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Keenly said:
i laugh at your useless attempt to discredit everything i have said



according to the rep i have received in the last 48 or so hours, a lot of people agree with what i have to say in this thread


so why dont we do something interesting here


RickWhite, You have not made a single intelligent comment in this entire thread. Why don't you just go away.
Click to expand...

NOOOOOO do not let Rick go, we WANT you here, You help us make our point, DO NOT LEAVE THIS THREAD!!!
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
NoDrama said:
You don't drill steel beams, you would drill reinforced concrete beams. You do realize these buildings are not made of concrete right? Or are you still lost on this?

No one says they used shaped charges ( They don't they use det cord), we are saying NANO THERMITE was used to cut the beams. You are having a hard time following all this ?
Click to expand...
Several obvious flaws here though.

First... ANY explosives.... would have to be placed ALL over to accomplish such a mighty feat. All in secret? Very very doubtful.

Second, Nano Thermite.
If someone wanted to take down the WTT's... they would NOT use Nano Thermite at all. There are far better and safer charges to use.

It's simply another indication of seeing the results and trying to backward fit a theory onto it.
 
RickWhite

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
I have better than that, lookeee here, If I threw a grand piano off of the top of one of the towers, it would take 10.4 seconds to hit the ground, how long did WTC take?? OMG its the same numbers you propose, how could this be unless the towers encountered no resistance from the "Supposedly" intact 100 stories below the impact?

From ....http://www.v911t.org/Freefall.php


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Using the known distance across the WTC tower (208 feet) I was able to gauge the screen of this video to scale. Using the step forward feature of my DVD player each step forward is one frame, and it moves forward in time at 24 frames per second, and so I have known distances and known time. This makes it possible to estimate the time and distance traveled by an object between 2 known points. I kept track of the distance by adhering post it notes to my screen. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php [/FONT]​



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In this screen shot I use the video controller to mark the exact spot where the tip of the antenna finally disappears. The starting point shows the antenna already in motion, I had to do that, otherwise the top of the antenna would not show up in the screen capture. Anyone with a DVD player, paint, Dreamweaver, and a way to crop pictures should be able to reproduce this precision analysis of the velocity of the collapse. [/FONT]​




[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif].[/FONT]​


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]​



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So we can see and measure the time it took for the antenna to move 231 feet with very good precision. We can conclude with great confidence that the WTC tower is falling with at least no resistance, and in fact may be being pulled down by a force in addition to gravity. As you can see in the calculations below an object falling in a vacuum would travel 100.4750 feet in 2.5 seconds. Here we have a descrepency that disagrees with the laws of gravity, the antenna falls 231 feet, and in a vaccum with no resistance it would have fallen 100.4750. [/FONT]​


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]​





[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Calculators will not be functional here you will have to go to the site [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is a drag, but calculating fall time in atmosphere is much more complicated than in a vacuum, but here we estimate the fall time of an apple based on 3 Coefficients of Drag. Fairly small changes in the CD have a fairly drastic effect on fall time. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD for a sphere has a huge range from .07 to .5, an apple is not a sphere, so an educated guess is a CD of .7 [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD @ .07 dropped from 610 feet = TV of 290.274 ft/sec = fall time of 6.1599 secs[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD @ .5 dropped from _610 feet = TV of 108.61 ft/sec_ = fall time of 7.3043 secs [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD @ .7 dropped from _610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/s ___= fall time of 8.0770 secs [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See this video, a study of the fall of WTC 7 http://www.v911t.org/911Clips.php[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Apples are not perfect spheres and so without wind tunnel testing one could estimate that .5 is closer to the CD than .07, or if we dropped an apple from 610 feet we could back our way in to the CD with algebra if we could observe the fall time. My guess is that the CD for an apple is more like .7 depending on the apple. Using a of .7 CD dropped from __610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/sec [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Conclusion: Call in the Myth Busters [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]​


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The original 7 World Trade Center was a 47-story building, designed by Emery Roth & Sons, with a red granite façade. The building was 610 feet (186 m) tall, with a trapezoid-shaped footprint that was 330 ft (101 m) long and 140 ft (43 m) wide.[1][2] Tishman Realty & Construction managed construction of the building, which began in 1984.[1] In March 1987, the building opened, to become the seventh structure of the World Trade Center. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So we see that 345 feet is covered in 5.125, and 375 feet is covered in 5.33 seconds. Below are the calculations of distance covered in freefall in 5.125 and 5.33 seconds.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall at 5.125 secs = ft and Freefall at 5.33 secs. = ft so it is safe to say that WTC 7 dropped at or very near freefall velocity. 422 v 345 (81.75%), is 77 feet more distance traveled. 456 v 375 (82.23%) freefall is 81 ft more distance traveled, so we can see based upon the gain of the % comparison that as the fall continues the building is getting closer to freefall velocity, not further away, in other words resistance is decreasing. WTC 7 is somehow accelerating at an increasing rate. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]See the method for used for estimating distances http://www.v911t.org/MakingScale.php[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This object falls 100 Meters (328 ft) in 4.4 seconds very nearly the same rate of fall as the examples above, further evidence of falling with nearly no resistance. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]source of the above freefall calculator: http://ww2.unime.it/weblab/mirror/ExplrSci/dswmedia/freefall.htm[/FONT]​



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]==================================[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD chart courtesy of NASA:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/shaped.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]NASA has neglected to tell us what the frontal area is.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD for a sphere has a huge range from .07 to .5 [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD @ .07 dropped from 610 feet = TV of 290.274 ft/sec = fall time of 6.1599[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD @ .5 dropped from __610 feet = TV of 108.61 ft/sec_ = fall time of 7.3043 secs [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]CD @ .7 dropped from _610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/s ___= fall time of 8.077 secs [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Apples are not perfect spheres and so without wind tunnel testing one could estimate that .5 is closer to the CD of an apple than .07, or if we dropped an apple from 610 feet we could back our way in to the CD with algebra if we could observe the fall time. My guess is that the CD for an apple is more like .7 depending on the apple. Using a of .7 CD @ .7 dropped from __610 feet = TV of 91.792 ft/sec [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Conclusion: Call in the Myth Busters [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall Of an Apple to Terminal Velocity, and then fall 610 feet (equal to WTC 7)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Weight of Apple .43 Pounds[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Size of Apple is 2.75 x 3 inches = 0.0625 sq ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient = .5 (worst case aerodynamic for a sphere) Note that an apple is not a sphere[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient = .07 (best aerodynamic case for a sphere) [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Source:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/shaped.html [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity = 290.274 ft per second or 88.4755152 meters per second. Source:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]=========================== Using 0.07 CD and 610 Feet ===============[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, the apple reaches terminal velocity and stops accelerating. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , = terminal velocity[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft here shows you would need 1310 ft to accelerate to terminal velocity, so the apple would fall at freefall for 610 feet. which is seconds and never achieve terminal velocity. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]=========================== Using .5 CD and 610 Feet================[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After 3.3780 seconds, after travailing a distance of 183.4432 feet the apple reaches terminal velocity, then would travel another 426.5568 ft at108.61 ft/s = 3.9263 + initial time of 3.3780 = 7.3043, total distance of 610 feet [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) states the height of WTC7 as 610ft = 185.928m[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, the apple hits terminal velocity [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , TV is achieved at after [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft In the first 3.3780 seconds the apple would travel 183.4432 feet with 426.5568 feet to go @ 108.61 ft/s = 3.9263 secs + initial time of 3.3780 secs = 7.3043 secs [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]=========================== Using .7 CD and 610 Feet================[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, the apple hits terminal velocity [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , terminal velocity[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft In the first 2.8549 seconds the apple would travel 131.0302 feet with 478.9698 feet to go @ 91.792 ft/s = 5.2179 secs + initial time of 2.8594 secs = 8.077 secs [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Alfons v911t [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the absence of frictional drag, an object near the surface of the earth will fall with the constant acceleration of gravity g. Position and speed at any time can be calculated from the motion equations. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Illustrated here is the situation where an object is released from rest. It's position and speed can be predicted for any time after that. Since all the quantities are directed downward, that direction is chosen as the positive direction in this case. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Enter data in any box and click outside the box. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Above tells how far something would fall in ten seconds. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]A very handy site for physics calculators[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Below is the calculating for how fast something would fall from 417 Meters (the height of the WTC towers) [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the absence of frictional drag, an object near the surface of the earth will fall with the constant acceleration of gravity g. Position and speed at any time can be calculated from the motion equations. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Illustrated here is the situation where an object is released from rest. It's position and speed can be predicted for any time after that. Since all the quantities are directed downward, that direction is chosen as the positive direction in this case. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Enter data in any box and click outside the box. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]You can play with this and other calculators @ the gsu site to prove the WTC towers fell too fast. I put this here on the v911t for referenece to it, and to have it documented in case. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]========== A study of top 15 floors of WTC Tower Fall Time in Atmosphere===============[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After 27 seconds, after travailing a distance of 12, 401 feet the top 15 floors of the WTC towers reaches terminal velocity, but we dropped the top 15 floors from 1181 feet, so it never achieves Terminal Velocity, and falls at the rate of free fall. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall time from 1181 ft = 8.5710[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]371800000 lbs(Total Mass of a WTC tower) /110 = 3380000 x 15 = 50700000 lbs (Total Mass of the Top 15 floors)[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mass of the Towers: [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://forum.physorg.com/What-was-the-weight-of-a-WTC-Tower_4299.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Area Dimension of a WTC Tower is 208.005 ft at base is 43264 sf[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dimension of Towers:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://en.structurae.de/structures/data/index.cfm?id=s0002118 [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Mass for top 15 floors[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]50700000 lbs[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cross Section Area [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]43264 sf[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.28[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1181[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]893 ft per second[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity Calculator at NASA [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft The distance after being dropped is more than 1181 ft. , and will fall at the same rate as freefall [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Freefall[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of interest here is the fact that atmosphere alone would stop the top 15 Floors from accelerating just from drag, if you dropped it from above 12, 401 feet. This begs the question, how much would it be slowed down if it had to fall through the rest of the WTC tower? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The density of a WTC Tower is 371800000/59185152 = 6.28 lbs per cubic feet [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Air density is 0.07 lbs per cubic foot [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The density of the medium that a body falls through has an effect on it's Terminal Velocity. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]A body will fall in a liquid slower than it will through a gas, and even slower through something solid. When stuff gets in the way, it slows down the thing moving through it, the more stuff in the way, the slower the body goes, if it is not stopped entirely. A bullet goes through the air faster than it goes through a 10 foot thick brick wall, when you move something it takes work/energy to do it. In the case of things falling, we know exactly what that quanity of energy is. This refutes the "pancake theory" in a solid and provable way, based on the bedrocks of Newtonian physics. Things fall slower when they fall through denser medium. [/FONT]



[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]========== A study of Grand Piano Fall Time in Atmosphere===============[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After 4 seconds, after travailing a distance of 257 feet the Grand Piano reaches terminal velocity, then falls 1111 at feet at 128.61 ft/s = 8.63 secs. + initial time of 4 seconds = 12.63 seconds total fall time from 1368 feet. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , Terminal Velocity[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Mass of Grand Piano[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]285 kg = 628.317 lb[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cross Section Area [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]25.8215261675 sf[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.28[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1368 ft. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]128.615 ft per second[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The beautiful new GC1 combines the duplex scaling and rich tonal character of the coveted C1 grand with cost-saving advantages in materials and production to create an instrument that's both expressive and uncommonly affordable.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Grand Piano Specifications:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Length: 161cm (5'3")[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Width: 149cm –[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Height: 101cm[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Weight: 285k[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]o Finished in Black Polyester[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]161 x 149 = 23989 sq cm[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://www.pianoplus.co.uk/yamaha-piano/grands.html[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Piano Mass and dimensions in english and metric:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]285 kg = 628.317 lb[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]161 cm = 5.28215 ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]149 cm = 4.88845 ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4.88845 x 5.28215 = 25.8215261675 sq. ft. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Dropped From 1368 feet[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient = 1.28 (Flat Object CD 1.28 [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/shaped.html[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude = 417 meters = 1368 ft[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]TV = 128.615[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But those are the outside dimensions of the piano, pianos are not rectangular, but more like a right triangle, shaped in the most economical way to encase the stings. So they actual surface area could be more like 13 sf. rather than almost 26 sf. Then Terminal Velocity would be 181.889 ft/sec[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Example of the shape of a Piano: http://www.strand7.com/html/pianopaper.htm[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After 5.65 seconds, after travailing a distance of 514.48 feet the Grand Piano reaches terminal velocity, then falls 853.52 at feet at 181.889 ft/sec = 4.69 secs. + initial time of 5.65 seconds = 10.34 seconds total fall time from 1368 feet. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]At time t = s after being dropped, [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the speed is vy = m/s = ft/s , [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The distance from the starting point will be [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]y = m= ft [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Mass of Grand Piano[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]285 kg = 628.317 lb[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Cross Section Area [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]16 sf[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Drag Coefficient[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.28[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Altitude [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1368 ft. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Terminal Velocity [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]181.889 ft/sec[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/termvr.html [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So the fall time would likely be between 10.34 seconds and 12.63 seconds, depending on the shape, and the attitude the piano assumes as it falls. [/FONT]





Beat that!
Click to expand...
Easily. There is no way in the world to calculate the terminal velocity of a falling building that is burning and hit by a commercial jet. Plus, even by these calculations the buildings took a few more seconds to collaps than an object in free fall. In the last second or two a free falling object would have travled hundreds of feet further. The calculations only reinforce wht I posted if you read them carfully.

One more thing. The author clearly is attempting to decieve people because he calculated the fall of the piano based on it falling horizontal with maximum surface area catching wind like a sail. In reality the piano would turn vertically and fall much faster. The same is true when skydivers fall. If you spread out and fall flat you fall around 180MPH but if you go into a dive you fall at around 220MPH IIRC.

Your data is a fraud.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
We say nano thermite because its already been proven to be in the dust samples taken on 911. There are certainly 1000 ways to skin a cat and I am not above accepting other methods of demo, but no facts have been presented to refute the find of nano thermite. There could possibly be a certain nano that was specifically designed or manufactured to do exactly what we are saying it did, cut steel beams or somehow degrade them to the necessay degree to cause 100% failure throughout the whole structure. Since all of the debris was instantly carted off and completely destroyed right away seem a bit fishy to me, I mean junk yards hold twisted metal stuff for years and years. Why go and melt down all the 911 steel right away?
 
K

Keenly

Guest
RickWhite said:
Easily. There is no way in the world to calculate the terminal velocity of a falling building that is burning and hit by a commercial jet. Plus, even by these calculations the buildings took a few more seconds to collaps than an object in free fall. In the last second or two a free falling object would have travled hundreds of feet further. The calculations only reinforce wht I posted if you read them carfully.
Click to expand...


"but but but, you cant measure the falling speed of this magic debris cause is magic, and some how different from every other object in existence"
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
Easily. There is no way in the world to calculate the terminal velocity of a falling building that is burning and hit by a commercial jet. Plus, even by these calculations the buildings took a few more seconds to collaps than an object in free fall. In the last second or two a free falling object would have travled hundreds of feet further. The calculations only reinforce wht I posted if you read them carfully.
Click to expand...

The calculations all come from NASA, its not like they AREN'T rocket scientists or anything. Your theory of a falling body only holds true in a pure vacuum, objects on earth reach a terminal velocity ( They won't go faster) in the first 4 seconds.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Keenly said:
here is newly released footage of the second plane hitting


at approx. 9-12 seconds, you can see a HUGE fireball, this is all of the jet fuel exploding and burning off as it catches fire on impact



this evidence is right in front of you, so debate it

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/09/new-footage-of-the-911-wtc-attack.html#more
Click to expand...

If you watch that video, you clearly see the fires are blowing air outwards , see all the paper floating in the air a mile away? its not sucking huge amounts of oxygen into it feeding itself. Good find Keen!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top