Back to the basics: collapse speed

This Washington Free Press article provides a great summary of the problems with NIST's report on the Twin Towers:

http://www.washingtonfreepress.org/84/worldTradeCenter.shtml

It is very well written and recommendable for people new to 9/11 Truth. It contains the points that the Loose Change guys should have raised when Ronald Wieck disingenuously said that truthers are not willing to engage in dialogue against the NIST report.

A retired physics teacher emailed to me that an object dropped from the roof of the Twin Towers would have reached the ground in 12 to 13 seconds. That is, in approximately the same time in which the towers totally collapsed.

According to a Finnish Doctor of Engineering, WTC 7 collapsed even slightly faster than an apple falling the same distance through air:
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/02/destruction-of-wtc-7.html

The WFP article states "From high school physics, a floor by floor gravitational collapse of the undamaged 90 floors of the north tower would take almost 80 seconds, not including the time delay to break the columns of each floor". That sounds credible, but where could I get the calculations?

If and when the above holds, it is shocking to realize that the world's peer-reviewed scientific journals are not -- to Chomsky's chagrin - filled with articles debunking the NIST report and promoting controlled demolition hypotheses. It would be interesting to know to what extent such articles have been submitted for peer review and rejected. I assume not so many have been submitted in the first place.

But controlled demolition is above all a scientific, and fairly easily proven, issue, so it is important that people with scientific credentials offer their articles challenging the official explanations to science journals instead of just publishing them on the internet.

And when communicating about these issues, it is important to concentrate on the most solid evidence. To me it appears to be the collapse speed of three entire skyscrapers. Molten metal is also important, but although there are numerous reports of it, there is no unambiguous video evidence. Eyewitness reports are also important, but they should be regarded as complementary evidence. The same applies to the squibs, and so on.

Collapse speed is the spearhead.

Here's a nice little primer

Here's a nice little primer for any discussion about wtc 7 and its collapse speed

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2364206678564389150&q=%2420+buck...

Great Post!

Here's a paper on collapse speed of the WTCs and an exercise in physics, working backwards from the observed events to prove that the OGCT is a fraud

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/BilliardBalls.html

Best wishes!

Thanks

I'd like to be able to present a simple proof that no scientist worthy of the title could dismiss.

?

Was this written by Judy Wood?

I thought this was one of the better articles written on this subject.... good graphics and very easy to convey to others.

I don't think that it matches the evidence exactly but it is much much much closer than the Government line.... I think her numbers figure it from the very top to the bottom which is right but the collapse started lower than the top.... but in all that would not affect the overall time very much if you look at her graphs of ten floors collapsing at a time or the one showing one floor collapsing at a time.

IMPLODING..... sorry

Total collapses

"I think her numbers figure it from the very top to the bottom which is right but the collapse started lower than the top...."

True, but the top portion of the buildings, too, "collapsed" into dust. The buildings did imp/explode throughout their entire height.

Correct!

Was this written by Judy Wood?

Correct!

I don't think that it matches the evidence exactly but it is much much much closer than the Government line....

Her paper is not a proof of what did happen, but a proof of what did not happen, i.e. the OGCT. BilliardBall model crushed the pancake theory even before NIST stopped backing it.

IMPLODING.....

WTC7? that was the build which imploded, WTC1/2 exploded.

THE SYMMETRY!!

it wasn't so much the speed that bugged me in the first place but the *symmetry* of the collapse.

Symmetry

Two buildings.... hit in completely different locations.... with completely unique fire pattern..... and completely different structural damage....

both collapsed / imploded / exploded... in the exact same manner.

chaos theory?

beyond twilight zone

outside the realm of logic

Good points

However, many scientists may find the collapse time argument more difficult to refute. There simply was not time for each floor to be destroyed as a result of gravitational energy.