K-9 Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 No it doesn't. If you had taken any physics classes, you'd know that the collapse was a series of inelastic collisions, and kinetic energy was not conserved. MOMENTUM, however, is. From which you can calculate the impluse imparted to successive floors. From which you can calculate the time duration of each inelastic collision (on the order of a hundredth of a second). To which you'd no doubt respond "But that still adds a more than a second to the collapse!" Which would be true if the buildings pancaked from the top floor down. They didn't. The top fifth of each building went into free-fall, the "pancaking" started around floor 85 (roughly). So you not only don't understand the physics, you don't even understand how the buildings collapsed. Idiot. ENERGY is conserved in any system, but KINETIC energy isn't conserved in a collision. It can be converted to other forms (heat, or used to reduce bigger objects to smaller ones). Easy enough to prove, too. If kinetic energy goes as velocity squared, and momentum goes as velocity, you can't conserve both. That is irrefutable, even for those that have to google and wiki between posts. I would have thought that the point you made up-thread about how jet fuel (and other combustibles for that matter), can burn hotter in certain conditions would have settled much of the debate. I see now it only served as fodder.
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 No it doesn't. If you had taken any physics classes, you'd know that the collapse was a series of inelastic collisions, and kinetic energy was not conserved. MOMENTUM, however, is. From which you can calculate the impluse imparted to successive floors. From which you can calculate the time duration of each inelastic collision (on the order of a hundredth of a second). To which you'd no doubt respond "But that still adds a more than a second to the collapse!" Which would be true if the buildings pancaked from the top floor down. They didn't. The top fifth of each building went into free-fall, the "pancaking" started around floor 85 (roughly). So you not only don't understand the physics, you don't even understand how the buildings collapsed. Idiot. None of which accounts for the official government release, which requires a 40% reduction in velocity, you twit. You haven't addressed my point, at all. You've simply talked around it, and not even skillfully. Ah, so you dont like it when the lives of others are minimized for a cause, do you? PWNED No, you useless cum stain, I don't like it when unstable psychopaths make implied threats against my family and friends. And for this reason, I'm likely going to file chages against you, and this website for tolerating your threats. I've already asked the moderation team for the site hosting information, and will be forwarding my request to SDS if nessecary. And where did I threaten you? Where did I say "Im going to" or "I will?" And where did I EVER mention your family? Oh....I DIDNT. So not only are you a truther hypocrite piece of **** punk, youre also a liar. Im done with you...rot in hell. Own your words, psychopath.
RkFast Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) Telling you to take a long walk off a short pier isnt a "threat" honey. And you ask me to own my words. WHAT WORDS???? Where did I threaten you with physical harm? Where did I mention your family? The cops...yeah...Im sure they are chomping at the bit to go after a party in an anyonymous internet spat about the cause of 9/11 (becuase...you know...those NEVER happen)....that took place one morning and someones [sniffle] wittle feewings got huurwt [sniffle] when she was told to take a flyin' leap. But after the cops laugh you off the phone, maybe you can get Jesse Ventura and Alex Jones on the case! Edited February 5, 2013 by RkFast
Magox Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) We all know DC TOM, and we all know he can be insufferable at times, but we also all know that he's the smartest guy that posts on TBD... When it comes to physics, I'll take the published physicists word over someone who did some reading on Physics. Edited February 5, 2013 by Magox
B-Man Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 When it comes to physics, I'll take the published physicists word over someone who did some reading on Physics. LOL.......to me arguing the physics, is like arguing about the "plumage" when the parrot's nailed to the perch. if you can't see whats right in front of you then you invent distractions. Sad mostly, except when the one arguing resorts to outlandish remarks and defensive, hate-filled responses, then its just boring. .
DC Tom Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 None of which accounts for the official government release, which requires a 40% reduction in velocity, you twit. You haven't addressed my point, at all. You've simply talked around it, and not even skillfully. A 40% REDUCTION in velocity? Now you're arguing the towers didn't free-fall? Christ, you can't even get your own conspiracy theory right.
TheMadCap Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 sweet Jesus, how did I miss this thread? This is GOLD I tell you, GOLD!!! Thank you kids, I have been most certainly entertained!
Maury Ballstein Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 this is definetly gold...............we got cops, physics, skeetshooting drones. PPP rules !!
RkFast Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) Ya know...after much thought maybe TYTT is right and it was a conspiracy. And I know who was in on it, BROTHER!!! Edited February 5, 2013 by RkFast
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 A 40% REDUCTION in velocity? Now you're arguing the towers didn't free-fall? Christ, you can't even get your own conspiracy theory right. You're as stupid sonofabitch, aren't cha'. Apparently you lack in English as well as physics. The government's argument is that the towers didn't freefall, because it couldn't freefall, per it's pancake theory. Then, when challenged, it revised it's stance, and said that it did freefall, without explaining the 40% difference. Jesus Christ. Keep tap dancing in your wornout shoes, Tom. We all know DC TOM, and we all know he can be insufferable at times, but we also all know that he's the smartest guy that posts on TBD... When it comes to physics, I'll take the published physicists word over someone who did some reading on Physics. Do your own work instead of taking the word of others, mine, Tom's, or anyone else's.
DC Tom Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 You're as stupid sonofabitch, aren't cha'. Apparently you lack in English as well as physics. The government's argument is that the towers didn't freefall, because it couldn't freefall, per it's pancake theory. Then, when challenged, it revised it's stance, and said that it did freefall, without explaining the 40% difference. Jesus Christ. Keep tap dancing in your wornout shoes, Tom. Now the government changed the documented time it took the towers to fall?
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Ya know...after much thought maybe TYTT is right and it was a conspiracy. And I know who was in on it, BROTHER!!! I'm sure your dead friends appriciate your sensitivity. Your a hack as well as a mentally frail psychopath who lacks the integrity to own his own words. Now the government changed the documented time it took the towers to fall? Yes.
RkFast Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) I'm sure your dead friends appriciate your sensitivity. Your a hack as well as a mentally frail psychopath who lacks the integrity to own his own words. A) WHAT WORDS, sister? Still waiting on that one. B) My friend had a killer sense of humor. If he saw this he would be laughing his ass off, babe. C) Yeah, Im kind of a hack. D) Hey, what time should I expect Jesse Ventura to come over tonight to give me a "talking to?" I need to know so he can sign my picture of him and the Iron Sheik and I have to pull it out of storage. Edited February 5, 2013 by RkFast
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 A) WHAT WORDS, sister? Still waiting on that one. B) My friend had a killer sense of humor. If he saw this he would be laughing his ass off, babe. C) Yeah, Im kind of a hack. D) Hey, what time should I expect Jesse Ventura to come over tonight to give me a "talking to?" I need to know so he can sign my picture of him and the Iron Sheik and I have to pull it out of storage. I'm glad you think I'm so pretty, it's a bit weird, but I can live with it. Let's just hope we don't meet in Hammer's lot before a game. I feel like you'd regret it. And again, I'm glad your friend is dead, and I'm glad his passing caused you pain. As to the threats? I'll let you address them with your lawyer.
RkFast Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) I'm glad you think I'm so pretty, it's a bit weird, but I can live with it. No, youre just a B word. Let's just hope we don't meet in Hammer's lot before a game. I feel like you'd regret it. Im sorry....is that a THREAT? Quick!!!! SOMEONE CALL THE COPS!!!!!! Actually, I WANT you to come at me at Hammer's. Knowing the good man, I know he doesnt tolerate nonsense. So Ill just stand there, laugh as you try to take a swing, I duck, you fall flat on your ass and then you get carted off and banned for life from his lot. Enjoy the rest of your games from the "Family" parking section! Ill be doing bowling ball shots and will blow the horn in your honor! And again, I'm glad your friend is dead, and I'm glad his passing caused you pain. Um...let me let you in on something.....I lied. I dont have a close friend who died. Seriously I dont. As to the threats? I'll let you address them with your lawyer. What threats? Where???!!??? Edited February 5, 2013 by RkFast
Jauronimo Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 With all the info thats come out, from the eyewitness accounts of MILLIONS all the way down the line, thats not good enough for you. Yeah, youre a real !@#$ing cynic. !@#$ing !@#$..... I say this with all sincerity...next time one of these things happen, I hope youre on the flight for a first row seat....you and the rest of your c-sucking piece of **** "cynic" friends. And if I get a posting vacation for writing this, it was worth it...just so I can tell a piece of garbage like yourself to go to hell. I'm happy it was your friends that died. I'm glad it caused you personal pain. I'm sensing a lot of frustration here. TYTT and Rk, perhaps if you two knew how your words were affecting each other we could find some common ground. TYTT, how does it make you feel when Rk wishes that you die in a terrorist attack or get beheaded with a dull pocket knife? Rk, when TYTT expresses joy that your friends and loved ones died on 9-11, how does that make you feel?
meazza Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Seriously both of you shut the !@#$ up you !@#$ing juveniles or take this in a private message.
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) No, youre just a B word. Im sorry....is that a THREAT? Quick!!!! SOMEONE CALL THE COPS!!!!!! Actually, I WANT you to come at me at Hammer's. Knowing the good man, I know he doesnt tolerate nonsense. So Ill just stand there, laugh as you try to take a swing, I duck, you fall flat on your ass and then you get carted off and banned for life from his lot. Enjoy the rest of your games from the "Family" parking section! Ill be doing bowling ball shots and will blow the horn in your honor! Um...let me let you in on something.....I lied. I dont have a close friend who died. Seriously I dont. What threats? Where???!!??? Ya know what... I violated my own personal rule in dealing with you. I appologize to the rest of the board for stooping to your level. It's beneath me. Good day. Edited February 5, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker
DC Tom Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Yes. Oh...okay. Did you know the Sandy Hook shootings were connected to LIBOR manipulation, too?
4merper4mer Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 If that were true, you'd understand the subject matter. "Freefall can only be achieved when a falling object has no structural components beneath it. There is only one way for a building to have no structural components beneath it, and that is to physically remove those lower structural components with an external force. If this doesn't happen, the upper part of a building must resort to crushing its lower structural components in it's decent. By crushing them itself, in it's decent, a portion of it's energy will be spent on crushing, and cannot, therefore, be spent on motion. Given this, the "pancake theory" cannot possibly allow for freefall velocity." Explain an alternative. You know lots of crap about science and stuff but don't know the difference between decent and descent? That's weird.
Recommended Posts