poppet Posted January 4, 2015 Author #2251 Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) Nerd wins challenge with 9/11 Truth physics TBS reality show called "King of the Nerds" Episode 7, saw a challenge where the nerds had to guess the results of dropped weights onto layers of glass, having to guess how many glass sheets would be shattered. Danielle a nerd girl gamer (sporting cotton candy pink hair), researched a number of 9/11 Physics sites to win the challenge beating 4 other nerds including a girl called “Moogega” who works as a Nasa Engineer! Danielle thanks 9/11 conspiracy theorists for her win, thus proving on national TV the credibility of the 9/11 movement. http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/57-news-releases-by-others/931-pink-haired-nerd-scores-win-thanks-to-911-truth-websites.html simple physics disproves the pancake theroy and even a nerd gets it. Edited January 4, 2015 by poppet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingswan Posted January 4, 2015 #2252 Share Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) Nerd wins challenge with 9/11 Truth physics So she had to solve a problem involving dropping an object onto panes of glass and she found a "911 physics" website which showed the results of dropping objects onto panes of glass? All that proves is that the "911 physics" website got the right results for dropping objects onto panes of glass. Since glass and steel fail in very different ways, it has little relevance to the collapse of a steel-framed building. Edit to add: Googling has failed to find me the site with the "911 physics" demo. Do you have a link? I did find some mainstream physics sites that mentioned the scenario. For instance, here is a way to get the same answer as the winner, with all the maths provided: http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/55633/how-to-calculate-the-number-of-glass-sheets-that-will-be-broken-by-a-falling-obj Edited January 4, 2015 by flyingswan 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 19, 2015 #2253 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Nerd wins challenge with 9/11 Truth physics TBS reality show called "King of the Nerds" Episode 7, saw a challenge where the nerds had to guess the results of dropped weights onto layers of glass, having to guess how many glass sheets would be shattered. Danielle a nerd girl gamer (sporting cotton candy pink hair), researched a number of 9/11 Physics sites to win the challenge beating 4 other nerds including a girl called “Moogega” who works as a Nasa Engineer! Danielle thanks 9/11 conspiracy theorists for her win, thus proving on national TV the credibility of the 9/11 movement. http://www.ae911trut...h-websites.html simple physics disproves the pancake theroy and even a nerd gets it. Also you dont need to be smart **** to know Psychics, all you need is a basic understanding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyeagle409 Posted January 19, 2015 #2254 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Nerd wins challenge with 9/11 Truth physics TBS reality show called "King of the Nerds" Episode 7, saw a challenge where the nerds had to guess the results of dropped weights onto layers of glass, having to guess how many glass sheets would be shattered. Danielle a nerd girl gamer (sporting cotton candy pink hair), researched a number of 9/11 Physics sites to win the challenge beating 4 other nerds including a girl called “Moogega” who works as a Nasa Engineer! Danielle thanks 9/11 conspiracy theorists for her win, thus proving on national TV the credibility of the 9/11 movement. http://www.ae911trut...h-websites.html simple physics disproves the pancake theroy and even a nerd gets it. False. The squibs seen in videos and photos proved that the floors were pancaking upon one another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyeagle409 Posted January 19, 2015 #2255 Share Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) Nerd wins challenge with 9/11 Truth physics TBS reality show called "King of the Nerds" Episode 7, saw a challenge where the nerds had to guess the results of dropped weights onto layers of glass, having to guess how many glass sheets would be shattered. Danielle a nerd girl gamer (sporting cotton candy pink hair), researched a number of 9/11 Physics sites to win the challenge beating 4 other nerds including a girl called “Moogega” who works as a Nasa Engineer! Danielle thanks 9/11 conspiracy theorists for her win, thus proving on national TV the credibility of the 9/11 movement. http://www.ae911trut...h-websites.html simple physics disproves the pancake theroy and even a nerd gets it. The experiment by no means apply to the collapse of the WTC towers. For an example, have the weight of the ball multiply itself each time it breaks a single pane of glass and then, you will understand the insignificance of that experiment. The floors of the WTC towers were supported by attachment clips, which can support only a limited amount of weight. Let's take a look here. Why does the following depiction debunk the experiment you have presented? "As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips." In other words, those little support clips were unable to arrest the momentum of multiple floors crashing down from above. I might add that the WTC Towers were not solid at all, but in fact, 95% air. Edited January 19, 2015 by skyeagle409 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet Posted January 19, 2015 Author #2256 Share Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) The experiment by no means apply to the collapse of the WTC towers. For an example, have the weight of the ball multiply itself each time it breaks a single pane of glass and then, you will understand the insignificance of that experiment. The floors of the WTC towers were supported by attachment clips, which can support only a limited amount of weight. Let's take a look here. Why does the following depiction debunk the experiment you have presented? "As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips." In other words, those little support clips were unable to arrest the momentum of multiple floors crashing down from above. I might add that the WTC Towers were not solid at all, but in fact, 95% air. sky this would only be true if you ignored newton's Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body. https://en.wikipedia..._laws_of_motion Edited January 19, 2015 by poppet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyeagle409 Posted January 20, 2015 #2257 Share Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) sky this would only be true if you ignored newton's Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body. https://en.wikipedia..._laws_of_motion What you have presented doesn't apply to the WTC buildings because they are not solid objects. Remember, their interiors composed 95% air. The focus must be on the floor supports because ground-based observers and observers in the sky watched as the WTC buildings buckled prior to their collapsed which was a clear indication that fire, not explosives, was slowly weakening their steel structures. Earlier skyscrapers (top) had columns spaced evenly across every floor. The World Trade Center (bottom) broke with tradition by having columns only in the central core and along the exterior walls. As you can see, if a number of floor clips fail, there is no way the momentum of several floors could have been stopped and the result will be a pancake collapse. Air between floors will be laterally forced out the buildings or through a path of least resistance.. . Edited January 20, 2015 by skyeagle409 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingswan Posted January 20, 2015 #2258 Share Posted January 20, 2015 sky this would only be true if you ignored newton's Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body. https://en.wikipedia..._laws_of_motion Could you explain exactly how, preferably with the maths, you think that Newton's Third Law is being violated when one object drops on to another object and damages it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Empty Garden Posted January 20, 2015 #2259 Share Posted January 20, 2015 The towers were not solid objects? What were they then? Using your standard, every building has air inside of it. People occupy them, after all, and they must breathe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyeagle409 Posted January 20, 2015 #2260 Share Posted January 20, 2015 The towers were not solid objects? That's right! Look at the construction of the WTC tower. What were they then? 95% air, and the remainder consisting of steel, aluminum and other materials used in its construction. Using your standard, every building has air inside of it. That's right, otherwise, you would be looking at a solid block of steel or concrete. People occupy them, after all, and they must breathe. That is why buildings are not solid objects. Do you consider a balloon as solid as a bowling ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted January 21, 2015 #2261 Share Posted January 21, 2015 The towers were not solid objects? What were they then? Using your standard, every building has air inside of it. People occupy them, after all, and they must breathe. what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyeagle409 Posted January 28, 2015 #2262 Share Posted January 28, 2015 you mean the thermal expansion on the 13th floor girder attached to column 79, this one column's failure resulted in total building failure in 10 secounds. http://www.nist.gov/...c_qa_082108.cfm From your link. Before 9/11, no high-rise building had ever collapsed as a result of fire. High-rises are built to withstand all types of office fires, including that which occurred in World Trade Center 7, which is why its collapse has great significance for architectural and engineering professionals in New York City and across the globe. There are valuable lessons to learn from its collapse, lessons that can and will save lives. Those buildings were not constructed in the same manner as the WTC buildings and they did not suffer the massive impact damage as was the case on 9/11. Fire protection of those other buildings remained intact unlike the WTC buildings, which was evident when witnesses reported the buckling of WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7 just before they collapsed. That was evidence that fire was weakening their steel structures to the point of failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted January 29, 2015 #2263 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) As this topic was taking a long time to load, the more recent posts have been split into a new thread, which you can find here. This thread will remain for archive purposes. Tiggs [Forum Mod Team] Edited January 29, 2015 by Tiggs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts