The 9/11 Forum

So you call this a collapse theory?

I fail to see how cutter charges made columns bow like that. If any posters believe otherwise I would like them to explain how these charges worked! As for thermite on the perimiter columns, it would have been clearly visible in the large areas where the columns bowed, but was not seen; so we can rule out thermite, super or nano, as well. (As I have said before, proponents of CD theories never offer anything but hand-waving fantasies about how the alleged dirty deed was done, .... and yet they are so quick to offer criticism of "natural collapse" theories!)

There's a very good collapse theory. If you cut the core columns in the 900 and 1000 rows at 95th and 104th/105th floor than the weight of the floating block will cause the bowing.

It accounts better for the extent of the bowing than the NIST theory, which would require a more than 3m sag in the entire area of floor 97/98. There are gazzilion of things in the NIST simulations that do show that the observed bowing......

Just look at some of my topics.
I shouldn't bother to write this post, because your attitude to this topic seems to be

Continuing on a regional model:

2 types of floor regions,
Open office space flooring (OOS)
Flooring within the core (CF)


OOS can naturally be divided into 8 regions

1) OOS directly north of the core (OOS n)
2) OOS directly east of the core (OOS e)
3) OOS directly west of the core (OOS w)
4) OOS directly south of the core (OOS s)
5) OOS northwest corner region (OOS nw)
6) OOS northeast corner region (OOS ne)
7) OOS southwest corner region (OOS sw)
8 ) OOS southeast corner region (OOS se)

and the core flooring into two regions

9) north core flooring, for WTC1 covering region with CC rows 500, 600, 700 and 800 (CF n)
10) south core flooring, for WTC1 covering the region with column rows 900, 1000 (CF s)

These are the 10 regions of a typical floor.


Timewise we divide the collapse into two or more phases:


1) Phase #1: process of mutual zone C, zone A destruction
2) Phase #2: process of erosion after Zone C disappears, leaving only Zone B smashing against Zone A


The crush mode must be different after the upper portion no longer acts as an intact "leveller".

Current guesses seem to put this phase transition point near the 80th floor.


One of the big differences between phase 1 and phase 2 mechanics is that zone B, which is rubble, has no rigid, fixed structure acting as a "crushing equalizer" or "levelling agent". At this transition point physics questions such as "speed of collapse", "equations of motion", "resistance force F", ect... are truly regional in nature.

Motion within different regions are no longer coupled or mutually dependent as they were before during phase 1.


Consider the consideration of collapse phases when processing data. When fitting a function to the data, there is no reason whatsoever to fit both phases 1 and 2 to the same function.

We would naturally feel free to fit different phases to different functional forms since each phase may involve different physical crushing process.

Why would you fit all data to a single function as if the entire collapse from initiation to ground involved only one process, one phase?


DBB has no physical justification to place so much weight on fitting WTC1 roofline data to equations in BV. There is no physical reason to prefer those equations over another fit.

I guarantee the reader DBB will continue to tell us that the data fits well to BV (and better to BLGB) so there is no reason to look elsewhere for a better fit. He'll continue to try to force feed WTC1 drop data into a BV, BLGB interpretation resistive force F, without any physical reason.

And in the wizardry of circular logic he will then tell you this is evidence the building followed a natural trajectory.


But the truth is there is no physical reason to do so.

Just as with WTC7 we can admit the probable existence of different collapse phases and are justified in fitting different functions to different phases in creative but physically meaningful ways.