sci.physics

In article < @ >,
Henry <9-11@ > wrote:
>collapsetime@ wrote:
>
>>> Your physics education, experience, and most of all, common sense is in
>>> serious question son.
>>> Buildings don't fall into their footprint at near freefall speeds without
>>> the use of controlled demolition. Resistance from lower floors would slow
>>> the collapse substantially.
>
>> So based on your physics expertise, what should the collapse time have
>> been? Please show your work.
>
> The towers couldn't have collapsed at all from damage near
>the top. The steel in the upper blocks was at least ten times
>lighter and thinner than the cold, undamaged steel frame below.
>


Rad up on "dynamic load" and "cascading failure. "

It's never the strongest part that fails, it's the weakest part.




----
Anyone that hasn't seen Ground Zero in NYC and the "Truth Movement"
kooks that hang out there should look at the first three videos. The
others should be required viewing by anyone that has an opinion about
9/11 and WTC or has never been to NYC.


Ground Zero 911 Conspiracy Wars by Ray Rivera
/videoplay?docid=4162315283354424113

The Ground Zeros by Mark Roberts
/videoplay?docid=5004042232637229146&hl=en

WTC Ground Zero 9/11/2007 Sad.
/watch?v=Qr2LeCXXIjo

The Naudet Film about 9/11 at WTC
/videoplay?docid=6371069744838112957&q=Naudet

Marks's collapse video
/videoplay?docid=2083421624495848233&hl=en

"The 9 - 11 Conspiracies - Fact or Fiction"
/torrent_details?id=125450

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001