Mechanical Engineering Professor From Clemson Speaks Up About WTC 'Collapses'

Judy Wood, a professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University, has recently published a website in which she discusses 'The Case for Controlled Demolition'.

Wood points out her concerns with the official story of a 'progressive collapse', or 'pancake collapse', by showing how much time such a chain reaction might take using a billiard ball model as an example. This segment of her analysis has one rather generous caveat in that it 'assumes pulverization is instantaneous and does not slow down the process' (a.k.a it ignores resistance), however even with this very generous 'gimme' her example still takes much longer than the approximately 10-15 second long collapse of the south tower. Keep in mind that she is not modeling the collapse itself, but instead using her example to compare to the tower's actual collapse.

Wood is yet another professor who has recently spoken up about her questions surrounding 9/11 by joining Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Please check out how her example might apply towards the collapses of the twin towers, and thank her for coming out in support of questioning 9/11.

I realize this link has been floating around for a couple of weeks, I wanted to double check with Professor Wood before posting her credentials along side the web link. Thanks Judy!

Excellent! I've been

Excellent! I've been wondering Judy Woods' opinions were not getting much "coverage".

I'm (still...) working on a followup letter to:

I'm determined to get this done this week.

Where can I listen to David

Where can I listen to David Griffins NYC lecture focuseing on the destruction of the WTC? I know its here somewhere and I cant find it. Obviously the video wont ever be released. Hope whoever is sitting on it is enjoying it since they wont sell/share it. Bullshit.

The DVD is for sale via Les

The DVD is for sale via Les Jamieson in NY

I'd like to share this list

I'd like to share this list of 9/11 related links I've collected:

WCPO (Cincinnati): Plane [Flight 93] Lands In Cleveland; Bomb Feared Aboard

C-SPAN VIDEO: Rep. Dennis Kucinich States That Bush Administration Let 9/11 Happen

BBC NEWS: Central Asia pipeline deal signed

BBC NEWS: Afghanistan's opium industry

LONDON GUARDIAN: This war on terrorism is bogus (commentary)
The 9/11 attacks gave the US an ideal pretext to use force to secure its global domination,12956,1036687,00.html

LONDON GUARDIAN: Iraq creating new breed of jihadists, says CIA,2763,1512597,00.html

BBC NEWS: Secret US plans for Iraq's oil

LONDON GUARDIAN: Blair-Bush deal before Iraq war revealed in secret memo
PM promised to be 'solidly behind' US invasion with or without UN backing,,1700881,00.html

WASHINGTON POST: Ex-CIA Official Faults Use of Data on Iraq
Intelligence 'Misused' to Justify War, He Says

PBS Interview: Powell's former chief of staff on Iraq intel:
'I participated in a hoax'

THE INDEPENDANT: Bush 'plotted to lure Saddam into war with fake UN plane'

Jaybird, Agree


Agree wholeheartedly. I don't wanna crap on the person who requested me not to host it, but it has been many months, and it is a killer presentation.

I will rip the audio from the video I have if it isn't out there.. I've been meaning to do that since the final video is still MIA.. let me knnw if you can't find it, because the audio on the video i have is not very good (another reason i want the final release ;) )


The version being sold up there is the one we have i believe.. we have been waiting on one that is to be further produced with video insets that will be available for order via the web.. if the final (not raw handi-cam) version is for sale up there please let me know!

nice list CB.

nice list CB.

Thanks for the fast reply

Thanks for the fast reply brothers.

Jaybird, you had mentioned


you had mentioned earlier today about working on some projects.. sign up on and post a thread about it in the 9/11 forum, i think you have some good ideas for stuff to work on..

I am sure the twin towers

I am sure the twin towers were brought down by controlled demolition, but I've gotta say I find the good professor's above paper to have some serious holes in it.

She argues that, if the pancake theory were true, then as each floor hit the floor below it was stopped and pulverized before the next floor started to fall and therefore the collapse could not pick up enough speed to reach bottom in 9.3 seconds.

But she is assuming that each subsequent floor would fall at the same rate of 32 ft/sec/sec. But I can imagine someone could easily question this assumption and assert that in fact each subsequent floor fell faster than normal because it absorbed some of the velocity of all the above floors.
To illustrate, a baseball that is batted straight down will hit the ground sooner than one that is simply dropped.

Or am I missing something?

chandler, that is exactly


that is exactly what i thought when i read the article as well.. but even then the idea holds true in that any type of absorption of the momentum force would have slowed the collapse exponentially..

any thoughts on the last chart in the billiard ball example?

dz:Im lost in reguard to

dz:Im lost in reguard to your above post. What projects/post are you refering to?

anyone know what Professor

anyone know what Professor Woods has her PhD in? Clemson's site does not seem to say. Also interesting that she needed to make a "janedoe" site. Maybe if there's enough out cry, they'd review her paper and post it like Prof Jones.

Jaybird, Sorry, probably


Sorry, probably just confused, thought you had posted about something earlier..

Im sorry I dont have

Im sorry I dont have anything going yet except trying to speak the truth to mostly deaf ears. I will never understand the majority of people and the lack of intrest concerning 911. I cant elaborate without getting real negative here. My positive attitude lasted a few hours tho! This situation of complete indifference, lack of curiosity, and apathy is enough to drive the few of us who care about our country and future nuts. I think I need a break from all this for a while. I say this often and the next day Im rite back wondering how everyone keeps going on like everything is fine and the countrys television perception of reality continues. If they take away the internet there will be no hope. Sorry but thats a fact. Good nite.

oh ya, dont forget to send

oh ya, dont forget to send in suggestions to her directly via the email link at the bottom of

i think another set of graphs showing the force that would be transfered between balls would be good.. i think a user here did something similar?

I need to start spell

I need to start spell checking. Damn!

I give up!!! America is

I give up!!!

America is lost.

There is one God and his mane is "Money"

All this fucking speeches, resistance, church meetings where only 100s turn up.

Whats the fucking point, when everything is overrided in C.Hill.

America is a fucking lying bitching fucked up country and Im FUCKING SICK of her dictating how I can live, who I can speak to and what my political beliefs are.

Fuck George BUSH
FUCK his administration,
FUCK the illuminati,
Fuck all you lying bastards


Its clear that America has no fucking balls at all when it comes to human beings. However, if a fucking dog was tortured or abused fucking shit would hit the fan wouldnt it?

so stop wasting your time people cos the BAstards will never admit to the fucking lies. Its clear as a nation we dont have the fight in us to fight these Devil Worshipping morons.

Mark my words there WILL be a WW3 and that fucking bush and his cheney team will have started it.

You only need to do a little research to find out this has nothing to do with the fight against terror/islam or anything.

This is all about NWO and PNAC and oil.



Susan wrote: This is all

Susan wrote:

This is all about NWO and PNAC and oil.


and the Second Coming, from what I heard

I understand your

I understand your frustration Susan but have faith, we will win this thing. It is just a matter of time. They will destroy themselves. Trust me. "Those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside." JFK

I cant take this anymore.

I cant take this anymore. Day after day, I keep researching 911 and day after day I keep coming to the same conclusion that its an iside job.

My heart is just broken. My faith is just broken and so is my spirit.

When, is my question. When will it get better, when will the masses listen and stop worshipping these fucking lunatics.

Whne can I take a fucking knife to Bushes balls.

If I feel like this, is it any wonder why people use suicide bomb? Its out of desperation cos they dont have any other avenue for people to take note.

Insurgence? How would you feel if America weas invaded? I would fucking grab every weapon I could find and start the good fight.

When will people think rationally again?

I wish I could give Judy a

I wish I could give Judy a kiss...

Nice, easy-to-read, webpage. Excellent


The model proposed by Judy

The model proposed by Judy Woods is not sound because
she supposes that the cinetic energy of the upper floors
is not transmitted to the lower floors upon impact,
which is obviously false otherwise the building wouldn't
pancake: there would be no reason for the lower floors to

In her hypothesis, the upper floors only "trigger"
the collapse of the lower ones but no cinetic energy is
transfered that way. However it makes sense in the control
demolition model: in this model, explosives bring down the
lower floors so that they do not alter the fall of the upper

So her model is a mix of lower (no cinetic energy transmitted)
and upper (no resistance from steel structure) approximations,
which is not good at finding a theoretical lower bound of the
total collapse time.

The physics of the pancake collapse is actually quite simple if
you want to compute the time it takes for the building to collapse
considering that all the potential energy provided by the weight
of the building is transformed into cinetic energy. This is of
course a lower approximation since the pulverisation of concrete
absorbs a great deal of energy which should not be accounted into
cinetic energy (according to the physics of concrete pulverisation
I read, but which I am unable to confirm or discard, the potential
energy of the mass of the building is not even sufficient the
pulverize its concrete to the very thin dust found on 9/11, which
finally discards the pancake collapse theory).

Let me explain the pancake model and compute its collapse time:
Each floor falls because the pancaked upperfloors fall on it.
We assume no resistance of the steel structure of the building,
just the inertia of lower floors slows the fall of the pancaked
upper floors.

Let h be the height between to consecutive stairs of the building
and m be the mass of one floor. Let g = 9.8 m/s^2 be the gravitational
constant determining free fall speed increase.

Let v1(n) be the speed of the n upper floors pancaked just after
the (n-1) pancaked upper floors have hit the nth floor (i.e. just
after the (n-1)th inelastic choc) and let v2(n) be the speed of
the n upper floors pancaked just before they hit the (n+1) floor
(i.e. just before the nth inelastic choc). Suppose free-fall speed
between each inelastic chocs.

Then you have the relation:

1/2*(n*m)*v2(n)^2-1/2*(n*m)*v1(n)^2 = m*g*h

Thus v2(n)^2-v1(n)^2 = 2*g*h

The choc is supposed to occur instantly :

1/2*(n*m)*v2(n)^2 + 1/2*m*0^2 = 1/2*((n+1)*m)*v1(n+1)^2

Thus v1(n+1)^2/v2(n)^2 = n/(n+1)

Supposing v1(1) = 0 (no initial speed), it is possible to

v1(n) = sqrt(g*h*(n-1))

Then you can compute the collapse time between
the (n-1)th and nth choc :

tn = sqrt(h/g)*(sqrt(n+1)-sqrt(n-1))

Total collapse time = t1+t2+...+t(n-1) = sqrt(h/g)*(sqrt(n)+sqrt(n-1))
Free fall time = sqrt(2*n*h/g)

Instanciate for h = 427/110 = 3.88 m
g = 9.8 m/s^2
n = 110

Pancake collapse time = 13.2 seconds
Free fall time = 9.3 seconds

So, you find a collapse time which is larger than the usually
admitted 10 to 12 seconds needed for total pancake collapse.
And I repeat, in this model, no pulverization of concrete
appears before the total collapse of the building AND
the steel structure is supposed to oppose no resistance
to the collapse (however, this steel did not become red
hot without an additional amount of energy, which source
is still unknown ...)

Quasi official pancake

Quasi official pancake theory ignores the massive steel center columns.

A forum for discussing

A forum for discussing anomalous aspects of the NIST coverups (oops sorry) REPORTS is The Independent Peer Review Committee website.

Serious discussion welcomed.

It is a credit to dz that he

It is a credit to dz that he checked with Judy before her information was posted.

Yes, I said it, dz has class.

Well, that's about all the sycophancy I have on hand.


dmx: You state for your


You state for your model, "And I repeat, in this model, no pulverization of concrete appears before the total collapse of the building AND the steel structure is supposed to oppose no resistance to the collapse..."

a) If your model assumes NO pulverization, how does it apply to the WTC? How do you account for the energy required to pulverize the material?

b) If your model assumes "no pulverization of concrete appears before the total collapse of the building," how do you account for the fact that we don't see two piles of 110 floors neatly stacked up at ground zero?

c) If your model assumes "the steel structure is supposed to oppose no resistance to the collapse," how does this apply to the WTC? Every floor of the WTC was supporting a load for over 25 years.

If you take the time to read Prof. Woods' paper, you will see that she accounts for each of these things that you've neglected to account for. I find her analysis to be quite sound. She neglected to account for two items, which she openly acknowledges, BOTH of which would increase the fall time. These are the following:

1) "It will take longer if air resistance is considered, but for simplicity, we'll neglect air resistance."

2) "It reality, this pulverization would slow down the "pancake" progression, so longer times would be expected."

Susan, (Hugs) You're in good


(Hugs) You're in good company here. The spiritual demands are beyond intense, but were foreseen by our artists, and provided for. Rest awhile and drink from this song that Carol Brouillet links us to;

To Susan and Dude, don't

To Susan and Dude, don't give up. The public is taking it's time waking up to the truth and it does take time. I've told all of my family and they obviously don't believe I'm a looney, but they still have blank stares as though I'm telling them about a good mystery I've recently read. Until they do the research themselves and realize it's real and proveable or start to accept that they've been lied to, not much will happen. But do something positive....get out and spread truth. The despair will pass. The knowledge is growing or you wouldn't have people questionning Hamilton on Cspan about 9/11 truth. People are waking up.

That brings me to a new topic though. I've heard many hear talking about Able Danger, Weldon and Kucinich, Ruppert and others. And let's remember that 5 years of wiretapping represents alot of Crap people can dig up on the lives of anyone who might think of revealing 9/11 truth. And those that can't be blackmailed perhaps are threatened and worse. The truth is, is the public is the last line of defense here. Think about it. You're not up against one or two people. You're up against a cabal of people who have so much power and will not take kindly if it is flushed away so easily. It will take the will of equal or greater numbers of people to remove them from power.

Individually we must keep fighting and as a whole the message will get out.

Judy Woods is great but

Judy Woods is great but complicated. To me the bottom line is the center support structure should have still been standing if the pancake theory is at all feasible. And secondly, if in order to pulverize concrete, the upper floors had to gather speed to create the force necessary, then where are those upper floors? I dont know if she mentioned that but there should have been at least 20 or 30 layers of concrete left at the bottom, undamaged and visible.

To John, The problem I found

To John,

The problem I found with Susan's model
is that she does not account for the
transmission of cinetic energy from the
upper floors to the lower floors appart
that it "triggers" the collapse of the
lower floors. This approximation is not
a lower approximation but an UPPER
approximation. You should not use local
upper approximations if you want to
obtain a global lower bound.

I claim my model provides a global
lower bound. But taking into account
the air resistance, the steel structure resistance,
the pulverization of concrete will certainly provide
even higher lower bounds. Is it needed since the lower
bound I obtained is already higher
than the measured total collapse time ?

I stress that I said the model of
Susan is better suited as a model
for controlled demolition. But what
are we looking for ? A proof that
pancake collapse is incoherent with
total collapse time or a proof that
controlled demolition is coherent
with total collapse time ?

I think the end of reality

I think the end of reality as we know it is not far off. The world is fucked. What is amazeing is there is no real terrorism in this country yet. So much for sleeper cells; just the Americans sleeping.

Hey dmx--Can your brilliant

Hey dmx--Can your brilliant scholarship & formulae also demonstrate why WTC-7 collapsed?

If not, here's my less eloquent, simpler theory:

1. Plan & wire WTC 1, 2, & 7, w/explosives for controlled demolition.

2. Detonate explosives during smokescreen of fear & chaos created by plane crashes.

3. Watch buildings neatly implode from a safe distance away.

"I've heard many hear

"I've heard many hear talking about Able Danger, Weldon and Kucinich, Ruppert and others. And let's remember that 5 years of wiretapping represents alot of Crap people can dig up on the lives of anyone who might think of revealing 9/11 truth. And those that can't be blackmailed perhaps are threatened and worse..."

Excellent point, Nemo! Anyone who would orchestrate 9/11 is capable of ANYTHING!

Hey Anonymous, My

Hey Anonymous,

My scholarship is not brilliant, it's
undergraduate ... ;-)

I am convinced WTC1,2 and 7 collapsed
because of controlled demolition but
nevertheless I think I should not
support incorrect arguments justifying
that claim.

WTC7 is not a pancake collapse as the
video footage clearly shows that
upperlevels do not pancake on lower
levels. WTC7 looks very different
than WTC 1 and 2. So my model does
not apply to WTC7.

The video footage of WTC7 is
sufficient to establish controlled
demolition and that is why it is

I think we have the same goal. But
the means are important because a
scientific theory can be completely
dismissed even though only 1% of its
arguments are incorrect.

a few notes about professor

a few notes about professor wood's work:

Her degrees:
Civil Engineering
Engineering Mechanics
Materials Engineering Science

about the website being named 'janedoe':
I made the janedoe website when I was still trying to stay anonymous .. I'm risking a lot by sticking my neck out. .. But, I realize that some of us need to step forward.

more on the billiard ball example:
In the text, I described why I did not use conservation of momentum -- as there is no conservation of mass! Note when the WTC has only 50 floors remaining, there isn't 60 floors pressing down on it. Actually, I see in the photograph that 50-floor stub of a tower as fully intact, while only "collapsing" at the top floor... and I see no building above that floor. And, once the floor is pulverized, it's gone. That energy has been spent. If floor 80 and above was pulverized (dust shooting out in all directions), how can that add momentum to floor 40 when it collapses?
(find more on this in her paper)

about submitting it as a peer review paper:
I'm in the process of preparing this to be submitted to a peer reviewed journal and will have a more full description about this.

hope that adds a bit more info.. a lot of the concerns some had here are addressed on her site, or have been addressed by her at some point..

thanks again judy :)

Guys, dmx is not trying to

Guys, dmx is not trying to support the OT when he doesn't include energy expenses relating to pulverization/deformation in his calculation, which describes a collapse without any resistance (except for inertia), complete transformation of PE into KE and ideal, elastic conservation of momentum. The point is: Even then, the collapse would've taken 13.2s at least.

I referred to Woods in my

I referred to Woods in my reply to Mia Dolan on Daily Kos.

It seems that I managed to fool her into "agreeing with" the 9/11 Commission that fires and debris damage caused WTC-7 to collapse. ;-) (below is a copy of my latest post to her)

Now run

Oh, my brother not only watched the videos, but looked at other data as well. And he is professionally qualified, unlike either of us.

I wrote: "are you simply taking the 9/11 Commission's word that fires and some damage levelled it?"

"I agree that falling debris and fires caused WTC 7 to come down"

In reality, the 9/11 Commission did not mention WTC-7 in a single sentence in its report.

Quite a way to deal with the world's third-worst building disaster, allegedly caused by the terrorist attack. No wonder the Commission has been nicknamed "Omission Commission"!

Here's another qualified person for you: Judy Woods, a professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University, criticizes the pancake theory at

Mia, you have demonstrated that you are not familiar with even the basic issues. You criticized me for not reading a report that you had to admit did not exist. You failed to point out that the 9/11 Commission completely ignored WTC-7. You falsely accused Jones of faking his peer review. You pretend that not allowing a real investigation into the collapse of a skyscraper is not a problem.

You haven't tackled substantial issues, only tangential ones. You haven't wanted to engage in genuine debate, instead resorting to summary judgements and labelling. For the money you must be receiving for that bullshit, you should do better. Please go away.

When someone like this Mia

When someone like this Mia Dolan adamantly promotes the most absurd 9/11 explanations (e.g., small scattered fires & debris imploded WTC-7) I can't help but assume she is with the Gov't disinfo crowd.

dz- Your 12:33 post answered

Your 12:33 post answered my questions. Thanks. It is indeed clear from photos of the collapse, that when the tower had collapsed to half its original height, there was no fifty-storey mass pressing it down from above.

So what was causing each floor in turn to collapse? It is glaringly obvious that even if one were to accept that somehow the plane and fire caused the top part to collapse, it still would not explain the collapse of the bottom part. It could not have been due to the weight of the upper part because, as the pictures make clear, the upper part has been turned into dust.

On May 21, 2006, the Trojan

On May 21, 2006, the Trojan Nuclear Power plant will be imploded by Controlled Demolition Inc. It is a 499 foot tower and expected to fall in 8 seconds. The tower is supposed to be a unique demolition because it "is taller and narrower - and reinforced to guard against almost any calamity."

2000 pounds of explosives will be embedded in 2500 holes drilled into the suport legs at the base of the towers and up as high as 250 feet.

It is designed to fall with "a slight tilt."

These guys are the world experts. Want to put a lie detector on 'em?

"assumes pulverization is

"assumes pulverization is instantaneous"

But that's only half the presumption: what about the underlying assumption that matter was, in fact, "pulverized"?

Given that no one has ever described any mechanism whatsoever by which so much concrete and glass and plastic, etc, could have been "pulverized" in a manner which would (or could!) have created so much smaller-than-2.5-micron powdery dust, with so few large chunks, I'm inclined to believe that matter was not pulverized but, rather, dissociated!!!

At least we know how such dissociation could have occurred...

911blimp, Is there an online


Is there an online source that you know of that describes a "plasma-based" weapon?

I remain skeptical... not

I remain skeptical... not about 911, that clearly was an inside plot, controlled demolition and all... but about this janedoe engineering professor.
I looked at her data and it does not look right to me. Simple things are wrong, like starting the collapse at the top floor instead of at the impact site (around 87th floor?)

I think if done right this line of argument is promising, but her approach is not right. And the links at the bottom of the site include known disinfo sites.

Use caution.
Possible disinfo here!

Ok dmx, fair enough. Good

Ok dmx, fair enough. Good job.

While I'm here, let me add 4 & 5:

4. Identify Osama & 19 Arabs as the perpetrators within a day or two. (Thus, no need for any further investigation.) No one will notice that we had all this conclusive intel on them, yet we had NO IDEA that they would crash planes into buildings. Sure.

5. Depict the 19 Arabs as devout Muslim supermen who were more formidable & disciplined than U.S. Navy Seals. No one will notice that they couldnÂ’t learn to fly a Cessna and were alcoholic losers & topless-bar/lap-dance enthusiasts. Of course.

dz, Is Professor Wood's PhD


Is Professor Wood's PhD in Civil Engineering, do you know??

reprehensor asked, Is there

reprehensor asked, Is there an online source that you know of that describes a "plasma-based" weapon?

Not that I'm aware of. It's evidently secret weapon technology no one's supposed to know about.

Why do I say "evidently"?

2 reasons:

1. Given that industry has apparently harnessed this technology into a reusable waste disposal appliance, for which they will sell a performance guarantee, it doesn't take much imagination (if fact I think it takes an imagination deficit not) to see that it could (and should) have been weaponized long ago by the military. (Historically, for all forms of energy, from fire to electricity to nuclear, it's always been easier and more natural to simply unleash it than to contain/control it.)

2. After reading that startech site, and learning how gas(es) and tiny particles escape out the top, and molten metal pools at the bottom, suddenly (for me, anyway) it became easy to connect the dots of too-much too-fine powdery dust, huge pyro clouds, molten metal found weeks afterward, and fires which could not be put out for 99 days despite constant dousing with water. Such unnatural, seemingly-unrelated pieces of evidence pretty much comprise the signature of matter exposed to plasma (ie, temps hotter than the sun) according to the folks who make/offer the technology.

(3). For years, I'd been puzzled by the phrase "tactical nuke". Now I'm not. IMHO (just connecting the dots), a "tactical nuke" 'must' be a non-nuclear non-conventional plasma-based (or similar) weapon, which some evil criminal with military connections decided would function well for waste- and evidence-disposal in a massively destructive, unthinkably horrible crime. (And, of course, the only people who really for sure knew what they'd seen were already sworn to secrecy.)

Plasma seems to be the most efficient way of producing near-nuclear destruction without all that nasty radiation, which is pretty much what one would demand from a "tactical nuke".

At least one person who claims to know what nuclear destruction looks like seems to think he recognized what we saw on 9/11. (Not me; I'm just a humble dot-connector, and I'm telling you that, for me anyway, these dots definitely do connect. Meanwhile, as I said, no one has ever come up with a viable "pulverization" mechanism, which is just 1 more reason why I'm thinking zebras [ie, unconventional super-hot/"plasma" weapon] not horses [eg, "thermite"] here.)

911blimp... If this "plasma

911blimp... If this "plasma weapon" is a weapon "no one's supposed to know about", then how, prey tell, do you?