The 9/11 Forum

Hard to catch a glimpse of the North section.

In the following clip you can see it well at about 0:40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZeaW4yb ... re=related


And below you can see it again at about 0:05. This clip allows you clearly see the spacial relation between the NE corner piece and the north piece.

You can also see, as I said, it is about 5 stories tall.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 0578&hl=en

This photo is from just the right angle to capture the elusive leading north perimeter section behind WTC 7.




At this point the reader may ask: Great, so you've shown that 3 of these pieces are indeed large interconnected perimeter sections that are leading the falling objects and are the first source of the blanket of obscuring dust along their respective sides.

You've also shown that, though large, they do not appear significantly deformed or buckled and that they all are, indeed, about 5 stories tall.

But how do you know that they originate from between floors 92 to 97, within the region of the distinct and perfectly horizontal "soot lines", smarty-pants?


I'll try to answer that in the next couple of posts.

And as for the fourth large interconnected perimeter section, from the east face, it can be seen here.



The photo is taken from the north. The NE corner piece is already out of sight, the dust trail can be seen. The large visible piece is yet again about 5 stories high like the others and shows no obvious deformities or signs of buckling, It, too, just kind of "fell off" the side of the building.


In summary, these four pieces are the ones which would be optimal for David C to use if he wishes to compare collapse propagation to free-fall, since both these pieces and collapse propagagation begin to move from the same location (floors 92 to 97) at the same time.

I'll continue to examine these large sections and where they originate from in the thread "N and W perimeter failure lines".

Hambone,

http://rapidshare.com/files/142650314/9 ... n.avi.html

In this video for example it looks like the rumbling sound starts before any visible movement and there are more videos around. If you crop a part of the video you get



The left wall of the south tower (seen from video) is the right part of the animation

placed roughly white spots on the estimated centre of mass of the object



With a placed parabola I would say the object is ejected with about 13.6 m/s

I also synchronized two videos and shifted them back together at the time that the object left the building and that was at this frame in time



I don’t believe the object is ejected due to air, released elastic energy would be a better option but seems to be insufficient.

ps. This is all old stuff from physorg

Einsteen, I couldn't download the link. Is it just me?

I want to learn more about the falling object and the other points raised.

Is the linked video accessible elsewhere?

A link to the old phys.org discussion?

How can I learn more?

einsteen wrote:Hambone,

http://rapidshare.com/files/142650314/9 ... n.avi.html

In this video for example it looks like the rumbling sound starts before any visible movement and there are more videos around. If you crop a part of the video you get



The left wall of the south tower (seen from video) is the right part of the animation

placed roughly white spots on the estimated centre of mass of the object



With a placed parabola I would say the object is ejected with about 13.6 m/s

I also synchronized two videos and shifted them back together at the time that the object left the building and that was at this frame in time



I don’t believe the object is ejected due to air, released elastic energy would be a better option but seems to be insufficient.

ps. This is all old stuff from physorg

Thanks for posting those!

It looks to me like the object makes a rather sharp turn in your plot. My impression is that the object falls from higher up and emerges from the smoke at what appears to be the sharp turn.