The 9/11 Forum

However I still suspect that looking for generic solutions that apply ...err... "generally"...is a waste of time. I think that valid solutions will always need to start from understanding of either the collapse mechanism which has already occurred OR the mechanism that could occur if the ...

So, check this out: When this model is extended to bidirectional crush, many combinations of sensible input parameters lead to exclusive crush-up to completion with no crush down at all. Even for cases of marginal structural capacity . How realistic is that? For most structures, not much. For the to...

I'm actually surprised at Dr. G signing on to something of this particular ilk. A little surprised. It would be cool if he'd show up and comment. Let me clarify. Dr. G already signed up for this kind of thing with BLGB. Both are scholarly papers which attempt some conceptual overreach, but are othe...

Still haven't read it all, but skimmed most. I would say the authors have adopted the "crush down then up" form of the model because it's much simpler to solve analytically or with simpler numerical computations, not because it has any basis in reality. This is true of me as well; my algeb...

He believes there should be the maximum theoretical resistive force from the structure. As do the authors of this paper, apparently. It can be seen from direct observation (which Dr. G did plenty of) that two conditions prevent the model from being directly applicable when based solely on ideal loa...

The second fatal flaw is taking the Bazant limit assumption and using it as a real world premise.... That's the core of my argument with Tony and now with this paper. I have not read the paper to see if (a)it explicitly mentions WTC 9/11... You probably have seen it at this point, but it does. I am...

OK, I think you've got it.

Xauxet, collectively.

SanderO wrote:...Sauret...

Naudet?

SanderO wrote:Rubble driven collapses of WHAT?

I guess that would be the operative question.

Mostly stuff trying to penetrate/entrain the same stuff, where the only difference is the former is a disarray of junk and the latter is intact but about to be disarrayed junk.

This paper was thrown out at me by Tony Szamboti as an alleged refutation of points I was arguing: Collapse Time Analysis of Multi-Story Structural Steel Buildings Thought some of you might be interested in this, particularly as Dr. G is one of the authors. Guess we know what he's been doing now. In...

Hi, anne. Welcome.

It hasn't been covered and, I'm sorry to say, I don't know. Static discharge? Seems awfully intense (bright in daylight) for a simple arc to discharge the fuselage. Good question.

In some respects, I regret starting threads like these, which might be good ideas, but ones which are never carried to fruition. The least I could do is conclude with the remarks I should've started with. Materials deform under stress and it takes energy to accomplish that. However, it is (mostly) t...

It isn't just him. How many people reading that post really understand what you said? Not 1 in 100, I'd guess. Now, how many people understand what I am saying? Likewise. In the person of psychehacker one sees an extreme case of someone who thinks he knows more than he does. What he believes himsel...

How on earth am I going to have a thread about monkeys without mentioning beachnut? ... I can envision it coming out of his mouth with a wet croak, or perhaps even a voice box, enunciating along with the tap-tap-tap of one gnarled hand on the keyboard... "Ad eyeteeth a hosier vomit onus" ...