PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-10-17, 17:56:15
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ... 93
Author Topic: 9/11 debate - enter at your own risk!  (Read 329320 times)
Group: Guest
Won't the groups in control seek to suppress any alternative energy source that threatens their control? 

I am sure something somewhere has been suppressed, but history is littered with once powerful technologies being completely discarded.  Telephone companies once ruled the world, but they could not stop the Internets.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
Maybe we should ask Peterae to start a separate thread for this subject of inverters and move this stuff there, as there is good info here that will be lost in the 9/11 discussion.

BTW I just bench tested a couple of dynamotors and they work equally well to step up or step down the DC voltage. No modifications necessary since they are basically two DC motors/generators on the same rotor shaft that share the stator field.

Another robust inverter idea would be to take one of those gas powered generators (with a blown engine, can be had cheaply) and replace the engine that drives the alternator with a husky DC motor. Then you have HV DC in and AC 120 /240 60 HZ output providing you regulate the speed of the DC motor, which is rather easy.

Naturally solid state is the best way to go, I'm just offering some innovative options for those on a budget that like to tinker but don't want to reinvent the wheel.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
Here is a true story you might enjoy:

Back in 1990, a company on the east coast USA that I am familiar with as I was a consultant to them manufactured large induction furnaces and electric arc furnaces that took an ingot and by progressive melting with an intense electric arc, the steel would re-solidify with exceptional purity and crystal alignment.

This steel was especially good for forming into high strength tubes such as could be used for missile casings.

The US Dept of Commerce fully approved these furnaces for shipment to IRAQ in 1990 and 1991 with no flags raised even though the dept knew of their potential use.

He frowned on anyone that drove an imported car. He was on the board of directors and said that the engineers should specify all made in USA components. When the engineering staff replied that they are too expensive and will price us out of the market, he backed off from that request.

The owner of the company always wore a little USA flag on his lapel, I know him personally.

Just goes to show that you can wear the flag, and wave the flag, but when it comes to money, patriotism usually goes out the window.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2927
tExB=qr
Thanks Ion.  The goal is definitely achievable through a variety of methods.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2138
Grumpy:
Quote
Won't the groups in control seek to suppress any alternative energy source that threatens their control?

How do we get the technology into enough hands to make it permanent before we're dead?   I'm optimistic that there is a solution, I just don't know what it is.

Sure they will; e.g., Henry Moray's device smashed by gov't agent Felix Fraser, decades ago.
But he made the mistake of seeking a US patent, and inviting a gov't inspector into his lab.  We won't make that mistake again, I think.
The solution seems to lie with a large number of researchers worldwide, producing "the" device then announcing on a single date/time -- and getting the demonstrations into their LOCAL media outlets (which are not all controlled).  And on Youtube etc.   It has to go viral worldwide in order to escape being squashed.  I believe we as a community are capable of this -- IF we can keep our collective mouths shut in the final month or two of the development, then speak out as one voice on a given Date/time.


Grumpy again:
Quote
No one else may see it yet, but changing the density of a magnetic field with a pulsed electric field is one of the keys to the universe.  You should try it and see.

You've got me intrigued -- how do I do this?  any details of the circuit/build?
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
From G

Quote
If the collector is continuous around the ring, it might be split up into segments and the voltage for each segment may be 50v, but the current is under the same influences, now paralleled.  You drop the voltage and the current stays the same for each segment.  A 2kw output now becomes 20kw. Quite a beautiful concept, if it works that way.  This makes a small ring a real power plant.

SM alluded to this very thing when he spoke of multiple "collectors" that could be put in series or parallel.

And it is common practice with transformer secondaries or  sources of any type. Just remember that pure current sources are paralleled and pure voltage sources are series connected to prevent backfeed, unless the voltage sources are all of the exact voltage and have some finite series impedance, then they too can be paralleled, as in transformer secondaries.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1335
Frequency equals matter...
@Grumpy,
Either this is out of the mouths of babes or you know:
Quote
No one else may see it yet, but changing the density of a magnetic field with a pulsed electric field is one of the keys to the universe.  You should try it and see.

THIS IS THE PATTERN OF THE STANDARD PROCESS IN ALL CONFIGURATIONS.

Compressing the magnetic field and letting it hit back.

This rings the aether like a bell. A bell sends a reverberating note through space that hits our aura.
The ring can send a very high speed compwave as a shockwave against the aether pushing it outward. It snaps back. We push it again in tune. Like water in a bath tub.  You can lower the volume appreciably with one hand. This is where you buy a clue. 8)

I am going down in history with this statement.  ;D

@Physicsprof,
I hope you realize that there are no rewards in publishing this in academia. There is only enough time to get killed. Reality will change within a week when things come full schedule. If you don't heed these words then you can be my [prairie dog].

Bifilar compwave generation in a toroid made of vertical bifilar windings over copper horizontal loops. Out of the mouths of babes...



---------------------------
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
For those of you that think remote detonation of individual unwired explosives placed in the upper floors of the twin towers  by microwave beams from building 7 is a "whackadoo" theory (thank you MH), here is a primer on the dangers and distance precautions required by explosives experts when working near radio energy sources.

Bear in mind that when we talk of gigahertz frequencies, we only require antenna lengths in the range of one inch or less, perfectly doable and capable of triggering a blasting cap to detonate the explosive.

Such tuned circuits could be dumbed down (made far less sensitive) by killing the "Q" of the resonant antenna circuit or using a higher temp igniter in the blasting cap. Alternately this can be done by reducing the energy delivered to the "fuse" with a resistor.

Hi power narrow horizontal beams swept downward provides the perfect timing mechanism without the need for complicated timing circuits and cross wiring of any type.

This is the elegant solution that eliminates the need for wiring and could have been placed in just a few days time.

We know about the power downs and security blackouts and the crews that brought large boxes of something into the buildings while the camera's and security were turned off.

We have reports of dust being found all over the desks of workers on other floors shortly after the power downs and security blackouts, carried through the ventilation system.
« Last Edit: 2011-12-01, 20:06:55 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 418
Concerning the return of this thread to this Board:

Pererae has transferred the whole thread back.  I'll have to begin exporting 9/11-related posts to the 9/11 related thread in "Misc. Discussions".   When I have the time.   I'm between home moves and jobs right now.   I'll get to transferring those posts to MH's authored thread later.   Best that I can do now.   Sorry for the hassle.   I would ordinarily be glad to do it for you quickly, and I often try to be accommodating whenever possible.

--Lee


---------------------------
"The truth comes from wisdom, and widsom comes from experience."
                   --Valdemar  Valerian
                   --from the Matrix series of books

 
"Whosoever speaks or otherwise acts, has no secrets."
                                     --Roman proverb?
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2927
tExB=qr
You've got me intrigued -- how do I do this?  any details of the circuit/build?[/b]

I made a coil with very high self-induction (see "Brooks Coil").  I pulsed this coil with either a 10kv DC spark gap system, or an avalanche transistor stack running at 1 to 4kv dc.  Both methods used a piece of coax as a delay to set the pulse width, about 5 feet long.

Anyway, While this coil is being pulsed, I hold a small neo magnet near it and the magnet, with your fingers, will buck all over the place in sort of steady rythm.  At the time, I just free-ran the pulses and the effect varies with the rate.  I could set this up again and sweep through a freq range, but this will take some time.

(I used to have a video of this, but lost it a couple of yers ago.)
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2138
@Grumpy,
Either this is out of the mouths of babes or you know:
THIS IS THE PATTERN OF THE STANDARD PROCESS IN ALL CONFIGURATIONS.

Compressing the magnetic field and letting it hit back.

This rings the aether like a bell. A bell sends a reverberating note through space that hits our aura.
The ring can send a very high speed compwave as a shockwave against the aether pushing it outward. It snaps back. We push it again in tune. Like water in a bath tub.  You can lower the volume appreciably with one hand. This is where you buy a clue. 8)

I am going down in history with this statement.  ;D

Probably, but too cryptic for me...   At least the MIB's won't get it?  ;)

Quote
@Physicsprof,
I hope you realize that there are no rewards in publishing this in academia. There is only enough time to get killed. Reality will change within a week when things come full schedule. If you don't heed these words then you can be my [prairie dog].

Totally realize -- and agree -- and further, I'm no longer in academia nor do I seek another professorship. (Although one was offered to me at Utah Valley University; I turned it down.)  This might be publishable; but it might get a "national security - shut up" stamp during the review process.

  Likewise, I don't have to worry about some University or corporation "owning" my ideas or work.  That's what I like about being 'retired', though still doing research in my home office.

@grumpy:
Quote
I made a coil with very high self-induction (see "Brooks Coil").  I pulsed this coil with either a 10kv DC spark gap system, or an avalanche transistor stack running at 1 to 4kv dc.  Both methods used a piece of coax as a delay to set the pulse width, about 5 feet long.

Anyway, While this coil is being pulsed, I hold a small neo magnet near it and the magnet, with your fingers, will buck all over the place in sort of steady rythm.  At the time, I just free-ran the pulses and the effect varies with the rate.  I could set this up again and sweep through a freq range, but this will take some time.

Thanks, Grumpy -- let me think on that.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2927
tExB=qr
bunch of cryptic stuff...

I think Spherics' choice of the term "COMP" was becuase the effect is "compimentary", meaning "in addition to".  There are several ways to look at what "addition" may actually mean.  Why buck, compress, or otherwise effect a magnetic field when you can just make it stronger at any location you wish?   The magnet experiment is just an easy way to see the interaction.  SM, Energia Celeste, spherics and others learned to use it and it  is a lot more than just a magnet near a coil.

It doesn't have to be as complicated as SM's "magical frequencies", or complicated epxlanations that abound.  To really understand, ask yourselves what a magnetic field really is, and then enjoy the ride.  Why does a magnetic field have to change in order to induce a current?  What is "current"?  These are the hard questions.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2927
tExB=qr
Thanks, Grumpy -- let me think on that.

Here is an old pic of the coil.
   
Group: Guest

It is well known that a  large aircraft at 400 to 500 mph cannot fly in level flight less than 100 feet from the ground because of "ground effect", the pressure built up between the aircraft and the ground.  But those skilled LOL Al Queda pilots were able to perform wonderful maneuvers and defy physics in hitting the Pentagon



That's a bunk notion, sorry. There were no physics defied when that plane hit the Pentagon, as it was -not- in level, but descending flight, otherwise it would have remained at your 100 foot high altitude, and no plane could ever do controlled flight into terrain.

As as pilot, I know about angle of attack, the wing's the thing, and yes, even at those speeds, you can fly a 757 into the ground, and into a building. Easily, actually. Unfortunately, since they are expensive, and hitting things is frowned upon by those other than terrorist whackos (fanatical whackjobs would be my preferred term for 'terrorists' anyway), we won't be seeing much real life data.

But yes, you can fly a big plane into something like the Pentagon. In fact, the faster you are going, the easier it may be. That ground effect, once a certain angle of attack was achieved, would let the thing coast right into it the rest of the way just like a puck on an air hockey table. Anyway, get yourself something based on realistic flight models, such as X-Plane and see for yourself. Then add in the very highly motivated aspect of someone behind the stick that day who knew that had to get it right, as opposed to knowing they have the comfort of a do-over.

I have an open mind, but I don't allow just anything to be poured into it. No offense meant to the intelligences of those viewing, but without someone like MileHigh on this forum, it would seem to be a place where logic & reason are not very welcome. My own opinion is that anyone who thinks we did not go to the Moon lives in a world mostly molded by belief, not facts. I've read all the conspiracy sites, then gone and found sites where their 'facts' are finely and easily debunked, for both Moon and 9/11.
 
I saw the NOVA show on the towers, and see nothing to indicate that is not a purely possible, and realistic assessment of what occurred. Things fall at 'freefall' speeds because that is what gravity does when it gets going. Doesn't matter what's below as to these buildings in question. The forces of a single floor below resisting forces from above, when impacted by the mass of several above, will and do give way easily, and then the next, and so on. It's Newton, not even rocket science.

Yes, compressed air from the acceleration of gravity along coming down from above will blow out windows and make for what looks like explosions too. The air finds it's own way, doesn't have to follow expected paths either...it follows the path of least resistance until it must blow out something finally - wherever that happens to be.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2138
   Thanks again, Grumpy.

@ION:   An astute and insightful analysis!   May I quote you? (giving you credit for the concept, certainly)


For those of you that think remote detonation of individual unwired explosives placed in the upper floors of the twin towers  by microwave beams from building 7 is a "whackadoo" theory (thank you MH), here is a primer on the dangers and distance precautions required by explosives experts when working near radio energy sources.

Bear in mind that when we talk of gigahertz frequencies, we only require antenna lengths in the range of one inch or less, perfectly doable and capable of triggering a blasting cap to detonate the explosive.

Such tuned circuits could be dumbed down (made far less sensitive) by killing the "Q" of the resonant antenna circuit or using a higher temp igniter in the blasting cap. Alternately this can be done by reducing the energy delivered to the "fuse" with a resistor.

Hi power narrow horizontal beams swept downward provides the perfect timing mechanism without the need for complicated timing circuits and cross wiring of any type.

This is the elegant solution that eliminates the need for wiring and could have been placed in just a few days time..


We know about the power downs and security blackouts and the crews that brought large boxes of something into the buildings while the camera's and security were turned off.

We have reports of dust being found all over the desks of workers on other floors shortly after the power downs and security blackouts, carried through the ventilation system.

   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2138

[snip] Things fall at 'freefall' speeds because that is what gravity does when it gets going. Doesn't matter what's below as to these buildings in question. The forces of a single floor below resisting forces from above, when impacted by the mass of several above, will and do give way easily, and then the next, and so on. It's Newton, not even rocket science.



Sorry, what you said above is "bunk."  I've taught Newtonian Physics for over 21 years, and let me see if I can state this clearly for you:  FREE-FALL ACCELERATION AS OBSERVED IN THE FALL OF WTC7 FOR OVER 100 FEET MEANS NOTHING WAS IN THE WAY TO SLOW THE FREE-FALL ACCELERATION DUE TO GRAVITY.  ANY MASS IN THE WAY, SUCH AS CONCRETE FLOORS OR STEEL BEAMS, WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE ROOF OUT OF FREE FALL, WHICH WAS OBSERVED for WTC7.

Indeed, this is what we mean by "free fall ACCELERATION" -- free to fall, with no mass in the way.  Any mass in the way would SLOW the fall, by conservation of momentum, even if the supporting beams were very weak.
  (e.g., MV initial = (Mi +m)Vfinal, so Vfinal < Vinitial.)

But in WTC 7 there were tens of thousands of tons of concrete and steel below the roof and upper floors.  SOMETHING (such as explosives!) had to move the material out of the path of the falling roof, for over 100 feet.

NOW -- you can't really escape this conclusion, because I and physicist David Chandler independently insisted that NIST get it right -- and they finally did, admitting to free-fall accleration of WTC7 for over 100 feet.


NIST: preliminary report on WTC 7 (which we challenged, publicly):

Quote
"Assuming that the descent speed was approximately constant..."

NIST: final report, agreeing with David Chandler and me after we challenged the above assumption and made them LOOK AT THE DATA:

Quote
“The slope of the velocity curve is approximately constant between about 1.75 s and 4.0 s, and a good straight line fit to the points in this range (open-circles in Figure 3-15) allowed estimation of a constant downward acceleration during this time interval.
“This acceleration was 32.2 ft/s2 (9.81 m/s2), equivalent to the acceleration of gravity g.”
“…This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft)…”
          NCSTAR_1A_p87

I have attached the NIST graph, which agrees with my analysis and Chandler's, for your convenience.
Here then is proof that explosives were used in WTC 7 -- unless you can find some other agent for moving all that concrete and steel OUT OF THE WAY of the falling roof for over 100 feet.  
 

Or -- maybe you disagree with the data finally admitted to by NIST (a national lab)?
   
Group: Guest
Sorry, what you said above is "bunk."    SOMETHING (such as explosives!) had to move the material out of the path of the falling roof, for over 100 feet.
 


Freefall obviously would be true freefall if there wasn't anything - at all- below, but I see all kinds of people saying the WTC big towers fell at freefall speeds, so had to be explosives. I just don't agree the facts support it.

Who is it who rigged all these explosives? When did they do it? How did they do it with no one working at those buildings observing it?
 
But forget that.

What in your dataset is the source of the data used to generate this notion of the 100 foot free fall for that building.

Which videos in particular?

   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
From Physics Professor:

Quote
@ION:   An astute and insightful analysis!   May I quote you? (giving you credit for the concept, certainly)

Not necessary for me to get credit for the theory, more important that the theory get out there to be scientifically challenged. Spread it into the community, you have more connections than I.

This would be extremely easy to test by anyone skilled in microwave beam technology, not my forte, but as an engineer, I know what is possible.

I'm sure any amateur radio operators that have worked with microwaves would find the theory sound.

On a small scale, it could be tested with the magnetron from a microwave oven, appropriate waveguides and a parabolic antenna. To simulate the fuse, a simple small lamp such as a "grain of wheat" type and tuned circuit could easily demonstrate the generation of temperatures at a distance high enough to ignite a primary detonator.

This is really nothing new, it is known technology that can be researched. It's just an insight that shoots down the naysayers that insist all that wiring could not have been placed in a short time and would have been noticed.

It also sheds a different light on Giuliani's 23rd floor bunker in building 7 and the need for it's demise. I'm certain that microwave equipment would have been blown to smithereens once it's job was finished.

Again, only necessary to take out enough floors to get the massive upper structure moving at a decent speed, gravity would finish the job.

 Nasa was once talking about beaming huge amounts of power from space (solar collectors) to earth using microwaves to solve our energy needs, since there would be little attenuation from an atmosphere for the solar collectors.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2138
Thanks, ION -- I'll share your concept with other researchers in the field.
Good point here, too:
Quote
This is really nothing new, it is known technology that can be researched. It's just an insight that shoots down the naysayers that insist all that wiring could not have been placed in a short time and would have been noticed.

Now, to answer ArtistGuy:


Freefall obviously would be true freefall if there wasn't anything - at all- below, but I see all kinds of people saying the WTC big towers fell at freefall speeds, so had to be explosives. I just don't agree the facts support it.

Who is it who rigged all these explosives? When did they do it? How did they do it with no one working at those buildings observing it?
 
But forget that.

What in your dataset is the source of the data used to generate this notion of the 100 foot free fall for that building.

Which videos in particular?



Interesting that ION has addressed some of your questions -- a complete answer would IMO require a criminal investigation with subpoena power -- motivated by the overwhelming evidence we now have for the use of explosives!

NOTE:  Here I'm talking specifically about WTC 7, the skyscraper which fell completely and totally to the ground on 9/11/2001, yet was NOT even hit by a plane!  The Towers also accelerated in their fall, which has been analyzed by several engineers (see JournalOf911Studies.com), but not at g=32.2 ft/s**2 as did WTC7.

A video of this fall of WTC7, the one I used in my analysis, is presented in my Australia talk, URL to youtube given in my post yesterday.  (I guess you missed it.)   Here is a link to THREE videos of the free-fall motion of WTC7,
http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

There is (AFAIK) no refutation published of the Jones/Chandler/NIST analysis for free-fall acceleration of WTC7. None.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
Artistguy:

A large number of "pilots for 911 truth" that fly the big birds would seem to disagree with you about the ground effect and angle of attack.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html

Do you actually fly a large jumbo jet?  What kind of plane do you fly? Playing with a flight simulator is only as good as the info you were given about the flight path, speeds and angle of attack. How do we know this is truthful information?

Sure you can crash a large jet into anything if the angle of attack is right. Not so if it is nearly level flight at high speed, then as a rule of thumb it is roughly limited to the wingspan length dimension, in this case I believe 127 feet above ground.

The powerful wingtip vortices  generated when flying at those speeds a few feet above the pentagon lawn would have seriously torn up the turf on it's way in, yet we see no evidence of lawn damage. I take it all as data.

Some insight may be gained on the planting of the explosives by eyewitness testimony that is available in interviews concerning the strange goings on in the weeks prior to 9 / 11 at the twin towers. These people courageously came forward and reported events that could probably only bring lots of trouble to their door.
« Last Edit: 2011-12-02, 00:13:36 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 418
I've revised the "radiant water plasma BEMF circuit" so that it has only one relay and then I added a battery.   What makes it significant for this thread is that that I'll further add a fluorescent tube to the circuit so it becomes a stand-alone UPS.   With additional solar modules, it becomes a power generator and a UPS as well.

The lighted solar module(s) circuit that recharges batteries as well is done.   The sames as the previous one, but with a fluorescent tube and solar modules.

Here it is:


Crap.   I can't see the pdf's before I post them with this software.   Will come back later.

--Lee


---------------------------
"The truth comes from wisdom, and widsom comes from experience."
                   --Valdemar  Valerian
                   --from the Matrix series of books

 
"Whosoever speaks or otherwise acts, has no secrets."
                                     --Roman proverb?
   
Group: Guest
Ion:

Quote
If you don't believe that remote radio detonation of explosives is a patented technique, you should do more research.

It's not that I don't believe in the remote radio-controlled detonation of explosives, that's just a trivial technical challenge.  What's wackadoo is that people would actually believe that people would set up such a system in a grand conspiracy involving hundreds of people or more over multiple years to destroy the WTC towers like some giant movie set special effect.  That's completely wackadoo in the extreme!

Quote
For the record, I have not called you or your theories wackadoo as you have called mine, nor have I called you a tinfoil hat Fascist idiot as you again have insinuated

Straw Man on the fascism comment, I was talking about a clip on YouTube.

Meanwhile, here you are actually acting like a fascist:

Quote
We'll probably keep you around for our amusement until it is time to jettison some of the "troll baggage"

Quote
What is your purpose and intention on this forum?

The answer to "Show me your papers." is "Kiss my ass."  I am not going to be interrogated by you, or have to justify my existence for you because you are a bit ratted.  Shame on you.  And a preemptive shame on most free energy enthusiasts that are so "cool and open to new ideas" that become spineless mutes when they see this kind of despicable behaviour.

This comment:

Quote
As for the moon landing, does reserving the right to withold an opinion due to lack of sufficient data and too many glaring problems in the official story make me "wackadoo"?  I think it is prudence.

I don't think it's prudence.

Quote
You will probably not reply to this and let it "slip away" so that you are not to embarrassed by your own behavior.

You should pull yourself together and take a look in the mirror.

Now I will try to get back to the 9/11 stuff.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
PhysicsProf:

So here is one of your critical points to support your argument:

Quote
Sorry, what you said above is "bunk."  I've taught Newtonian Physics for over 21 years, and let me see if I can state this clearly for you:  FREE-FALL ACCELERATION AS OBSERVED IN THE FALL OF WTC7 FOR OVER 100 FEET MEANS NOTHING WAS IN THE WAY TO SLOW THE FREE-FALL ACCELERATION DUE TO GRAVITY.  ANY MASS IN THE WAY, SUCH AS CONCRETE FLOORS OR STEEL BEAMS, WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE ROOF OUT OF FREE FALL, WHICH WAS OBSERVED for WTC7.

Indeed, this is what we mean by "free fall ACCELERATION" -- free to fall, with no mass in the way.  Any mass in the way would SLOW the fall, by conservation of momentum, even if the supporting beams were very weak.
  (e.g., MV initial = (Mi +m)Vfinal, so Vfinal < Vinitial.)

But in WTC 7 there were tens of thousands of tons of concrete and steel below the roof and upper floors.  SOMETHING (such as explosives!) had to move the material out of the path of the falling roof, for over 100 feet.

ArtistGuy basically answered this and I alluded to the explanation for this a few days ago.  Indeed the building could fall at a speed that was very close to free fall.

The explanation is also very simple.  Let's assume for the sake of argument that the main vertical support beams (about 50-ish if I recall) all failed at the bottom of the building.  So you have the mass of a 47-story office building where the structural integrity of the very bottom of the building, the main vertical support beams, has been catastrophically corrupted.

Once a given vertical support beam looses its proper vertical load-bearing function because its geometry has been changed, and coupling that with the fact that the weight above the beam is immense, that of a 47-story office building, then all hell will break loose.

You deform the vertical lines of the main support beams, then on the massive scale of the office building, those beams may as well be like limp cooked spaghetti.  The beams started to twist and deform like curlicues and all of a sudden had no real load bearing capacity and the building started to go down and crush itself out of existence.

The amount of resistance offered by the deforming curlicue wet spagetti support beams relative to the weight of the falling building was negligible and the building went into free fall.   By the time the building had dropped just one single story and built up some momentum, then the bending spaghetti support beams offered even less resistance relative to the momentum of the falling building and as a result the building was in full near absolute free-fall.  Only after the mass of the remaining upper floors of the building started to become comparable to the resistance offered by the crumpling support columns did the decent rate of the building start to noticeably slow down.

That's my take on it and it all fits relative to the observed data as far as I am concerned.

What you seem to be missing in your presentations is a critical examination of the relative magnitudes of forces and effects, and this is extremely important.

So, seriously now, did you ever consider this analysis?   This theory of the collapse mechanism for Building 7 came to me shortly after seeing the clip the first time.

The observed free fall acceleration of Building 7's collapse has a boring mundane common sense explanation as far as I am concerned.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2011-12-02, 11:38:39 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3057
It's turtles all the way down
Curlicues? Limp Cooked Spaghetti? Curlicue wet spaghetti support beams....now that's real humor.  Al Dente steel perhaps?

That theory definitely gets the big gong from me. Have you ever worked in a steel mill? (I have and know what it takes to melt or deform steel)

MH said:
Quote
It's not that I don't believe in the remote radio-controlled detonation of explosives, that's just a trivial technical challenge.  What's wackadoo is that people would actually believe that people would set up such a system in a grand conspiracy involving hundreds of people or more over multiple years to destroy the WTC towers like some giant movie set special effect.  That's completely wackadoo in the extreme!

That's a large exaggeration of the manpower and the time required. Ever hear of compartmentalization. A small team maybe four guys to set up the microwave beaming equipment, and perhaps a dozen to plant the explosives over a couple of days. Then these guys are given a new mission a few months later which finds them all on the same plane that mysteriously breaks up and goes down in the harbor on it's takeff, no survivors. These are expendable assets too risky to keep alive. No years or hundreds of people.

Quote
The explanation is also very simple.  Let's assume for the sake of argument that the main vertical support beams (about 50-ish if I recall) all failed at the bottom of the building.  So you have the mass of a 47-story office building where the structural integrity of the very bottom of the building, the main vertical support beams, has been catastrophically corrupted.

That explanation is very simple  indeed but extremely improbable, all 50 support beams at the base of the building fail at once? Even the interior support beams? By your theory, we should be seeing large buildings just free falling to the ground all the time. I'm sorry MH you've got to be kidding.

BTW Nice cut and paste and taking things out of context to improve your image.

I often like what I see in the mirror, but not some of the theories from you sir! (some are ok)

Quote
And a preemptive shame on most free energy enthusiasts that are so "cool and open to new ideas" that become spineless mutes when they see this kind of despicable behaviour.

I agree with you, something should be done about your behavior but what the heck, live and let live.



« Last Edit: 2011-12-02, 02:50:56 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2927
tExB=qr
I don't think we have seen anything yet.

Somehow, they have to remove that mosque, "before" they can rebuild the Temple of Solomon.

Then there is the prophecy that the Vatican is "destroyed", once "Peter of Rome" becomes the last Pope.

Exciting times we are living in.

   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ... 93
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-10-17, 17:56:15