Essential Reading/Viewing

Discuss what you think really happened in New York on 9/11/2001

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Essential Reading/Viewing

Postby Zep Tepi » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:09 pm

Purdue University researchers have developed a scientifically based video animation of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. Their research has found that it was the weight of the fuel combined with the fire, and not the aircraft itself, that caused the most damage to the buildings. This information can be used by engineers to build new structures that are better able to withstand such attacks, the researchers say.

This of course supports the original findings that the initial impact from the hijacked airplanes stripped away crucial fireproofing material, eventually causing the towers to collapse under their own weight.

No room for crazed conspiracy theorists in this report, this is based purely on science and proper research - not sound bytes and nonsense.

The following link contains the report and access to several videos of these unique animations.

Purdue creates scientifically based animation of 9/11 attack

Excerpts from the report:
Structural engineers need to know from a scientific perspective what happened to the buildings during the terrorist attacks in order to prevent future failures. The search for answers continues with the help of a state-of-the-art animated visualization created by researchers at Purdue University.

{snip}

"Scientific simulations restrict us to showing the things that are absolutely essential to the engineer," Hoffmann says. "This gives us a simulation that doesn't deliver much visual information to a layperson. Our animation takes that scientific model and adds back the visual information required to make it a more effective communication tool."

{snip}

The scientific simulation, the completion of which was announced last September, required several test runs before the researchers were satisfied; the final test run required more than 80 hours of high-performance computing. The simulation depicts how a plane tore through several stories of the World Trade Center north tower within a half-second and found that the weight of the fuel acted like a flash flood of flaming liquid, knocking out essential structural columns within the building and removing fireproofing insulation from other support structures. The simulation used lines and dots to show the aircraft and building during the event.

{snip}

"The crashes and computer models you often see on television are not scientifically accurate," he says. "This provides an alternative that is useful to the nonexpert but is also scientifically accurate, so it provides a more realistic picture of the event."

{snip}

As with an earlier simulation developed by this team that examined the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, the World Trade Center simulation showed that it was the weight of the 10,000 gallons of fuel more than anything else that caused the damage.

"It is the weight, the kinetic energy of the fuel that causes much of the damage in these events," Hoffmann says. "If it weren't for the subsequent fire, the structural damage might be almost the same if the planes had been filled with water instead of fuel."

{snip}

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."


What are the odds that the CT'ers will simply bleat about how the Purdue researchers have been paid off by the USG? When they can't counter an argument using logic and reason, they resort to fantasy.

Cheers,
Zep
.
Image
User avatar
Zep Tepi
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2150
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:59 pm


Re: Essential Reading/Viewing

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:26 pm

Zep Tepi wrote:
Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."


What are the odds that the CT'ers will simply bleat about how the Purdue researchers have been paid off by the USG? When they can't counter an argument using logic and reason, they resort to fantasy.


Thanks for this, Zep. I had seen it on the net earlier and thought of posting something here. Indeed, the concept that I have highlighted in the above passage is fundamental to structures that are built with columns. The concept is called Euler Buckling, named after the scientist who first quantified it as a differential equation. It is THE FUNDAMENTAL FAILURE MODE of a vertical structural column. Furthermore, there is ample video evidence of the onset of Euler Buckling in BOTH WTC towers prior to their collapse.

Along the lines of your comment above, each and every time I encounter a 9/11 CT yokel who insists there were explosives, and that the building COULD NOT have come down as a result of the fire, I ask them to address Euler Buckling. They ignore it. I then usually have to ask them if they know what Euler Buckling is. Still they ignore it. I then lay out an easily-digestable explanation of Euler buckling that even a layman can comprehend, including how heat reduces the modulus of rigidity of steel (a key variable in the Euler Buckling differential equation). The CTers cannot address it, mostly because they don't understand structures and cannot fathom that this is THE FUNDAMENTAL FAILURE MODE of a vertical structural column.

Each and every CTer who claims to have a scientific analysis that "proves" it was a controlled demolition (CD) does NOT address Euler Buckling at all. This includes physicist Steven Jones from BYU!!! Before he can put forward his theory of CD, he must first address Euler Buckling. He does not. As such, I think he should not only be barred from teaching anymore, but I think he credentials in PHYSICS (!!!) should be revoked!

There has been NO CTer that I have encountered who has been able to address the Euler Buckling issue. If anyone thinks they can, then this professor of aerospace engineering is ready to listen.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:31 pm

For sake of completness I offer the following page that explains Euler buckling:

http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/machines/buckling.htm

Of all of these modes of failure, buckling is probably the most common and most catastrophic.


The upshot of Euler's science shows that, once a column begins to deflect, things get worse as it continues to deflect, until it fractures! This is what happened to the WTC columns which were already heated (Youngs Modulus reduced) from the fire.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Postby wetsystems » Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:52 pm

Even an accidental Reichstag is a Reichstag, nonetheless- melting beams or not.
The opportunism of fascists knows no bounds.
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain

Postby I.P.Freely » Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:59 pm

Did building #7 get hit with a plane too? Thats the one I,d like to know about.

But anyways those things carry 10,000 gallons thats a lot moltov cocktails aye toon. I can tell you from being slammed to the seabed a few times liquid will do that kind damage.
"You can either trust people or not. I choose to trust what people say and sometimes I get lied to. If I were to trust no one I would never hear the truth." - James (IPF) Martell
I.P.Freely
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:48 pm

Postby ryguy » Mon Aug 06, 2007 1:43 pm

I.P.Freely wrote:Did building #7 get hit with a plane too? Thats the one I,d like to know about.


Read this thread. Some good discussion there on that topic.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby I.P.Freely » Mon Aug 06, 2007 1:59 pm

ryguy wrote:
I.P.Freely wrote:Did building #7 get hit with a plane too? Thats the one I,d like to know about.


Read this thread. Some good discussion there on that topic.

-Ry


I like this explaination:

"ASSERTION #7
“WTC 7 was intentionally ‘pulled down’ with explosives. No airplane hit it, and the building owner himself was quoted as saying he made a decision to ‘pull it’.”
PROTEC COMMENT: This scenario is extremely unlikely for many reasons. "


Yeah and I claim for many reasons I,m Mertle the Turtle
"You can either trust people or not. I choose to trust what people say and sometimes I get lied to. If I were to trust no one I would never hear the truth." - James (IPF) Martell
I.P.Freely
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:48 pm

Postby wetsystems » Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:16 pm

My point was that regardless of whether or not there was complicity by the Bush gang the result was the same. The PNAC report concluded that in order for the United States to assert its 'rightful' global hegemony (as proposed by the authors which included Pearl, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and all the rest of the neocon fascists who later ran the Bush foreign policy) a 'new Pearl Harbor' was required.* This was either that or a Reichstag fire. Choose your poison. In either case it was the maudlin justification used for invading Iraq and- (of all places!) Afghanistan as well as their excuse to eviscerate the Bill of Rights.

*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_fo ... _Harbor.22
And I should remark that I am saving my insults for Toon for "just the right time" when I will strike at his soft, white underbelly for maximum damage and humiliation. Ray Hudson 2007
User avatar
wetsystems
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: uncertain

Re: Essential Reading/Viewing

Postby torbjon » Thu Aug 14, 2008 8:06 am

So I want to toss this into the "essential viewing" list:

http://www.livevideo.com/socialservice

I've been chatting with this guy for a couple of years now, just answering questions and telling him what I experienced then and after *shrugs*

The ones I'm recommending are his "September Clues" series... they used to be in smaller parts but he's cleaned them up and grouped them into two larger (longer) documentaries.

NO DIALOG! A little text and the Live News Footage we all saw at the time, nothing else. (dialog from the news footage, but no V.O. crap, no schmancy animations or graphics or diagrams or far out stories or indepth hard core scientific smoke screens. Live News Footage from that day, tha's it.)

YES he has an agenda but he does not really shove it down your thoat, just watch the news, make up your own mind.

A few things I take issue with but in general Incredibly Thought Provoking.

I don't chat this subject much, I have Never pushed this guys work before (or anyones work regarding this subject) so the fact that I'm so here and now may (should) mean something to somebody... or not *shrugs*

Some things to keep in mind. I was there. I was "fresh" out of Alaska (been in the city for a year at that time), and I had close ties with Human Rights Watch and the "inside" information that was availible to them. I have yet to meet one person in real life or on the internet that can make those three claims or fully comprehend just exactly What those claims mean.

I doubt I'll be chatting much about this again unless I meet someone with similar experiences / perceptions that I was in possession of at the time.

good luck
Expendable Guy. The show is no good without them.
User avatar
torbjon
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:08 am
Location: New Jersey


Google

Return to 911 - What Really Happened?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron