Milestone Reached: 100 Papers Published in the Journal of 911 Studies with "Sudden Collapse Initiation Impossible"

Dr. Frank Legge and Mechanical Engineer Tony Szamboti team together on a paper published today in the Journal of 9/11 Studies, entitled:
"9/11 and the Twin Towers: Sudden Collapse Initiation was Impossible"
This paper is the 100th paper to be published in the Journal of 9/11 studies in its nineteen months of existence, or about five scholarly, peer-reviewed papers per month on average (including full articles and letters). A great place to get solid facts and analyses!

This paper should be read for its cogent, pithy arguments regarding the sudden initiation of the destruction of the Towers. Quoting brief extracts:

"Numerous arguments have been presented that the Twin Towers at the World Trade Centre could not have collapsed in the observed manner due to the cause asserted in the NIST report, namely damage from plane impact and fire. 1 The bases of these arguments include the rapidity and symmetry of collapse, 2 the adequacy of the steel supports, 3 and the finding of incendiary residues in the dust. 4 It has also been argued that the initiating event in the official explanation, the sudden collapse of one storey, 1 could not have occurred because the steel was not hot enough. 5 This argument is based on data set out in the NIST report itself. There is another argument, as will be described here, that is based simply on the behaviour of hot steel under load...."

Conclusion: "It is clear therefore that the upper section should only have moved down slowly and only continued to do so if additional heat was supplied. A slow, protracted, and sagging collapse was not observed however with either tower. As observed in videos of both tower collapses, the upper sections suddenly start to fall and disintegrate.10 In the case of the south tower, initially a lean of the upper section developed but within the first second this turned into a rapid collapse with upper section disintegration, just as was observed with the north tower.

"It appears therefore that the official concept of a free fall collapse of the upper portion through the initiation storey, due to heat effects from fire, is a fantasy. If the temperature did become high enough for collapse to occur it could not have happened in the observed manner. 9 In particular it could not have been sudden and thus could not have produced the velocity, and hence the momentum and kinetic energy, upon which the official story depends for the second stage of collapse. In contrast, all observations are in accord with the use of explosives in a timed sequence."

The paper is concise and packs a punch in just 3 pages. You may wish to read the rest of the paper here:

Thanks Dr. Jones

For all your effort,and for coming here to share your information. Many hands make light work.

Thanks for all of your

Thanks for all of your contributions, Prof. Jones.

Additionally, Legge's papers are particularly good as they are short and go straight to the point. This comment is not meant to detract from other papers, but just to compliment Legge (and Szamboti) on consistently producing articles that work well on the internet and are able to reach a wide audience.

JFK on secrecy and the press

Welcome addition!

Too little analysis may have been devoted to the implausibility of a sudden, total collapse of the initial floor.

So, based on the chart, steel actually begins to dramatically gain strength precisely at the temperatures that Eagar and others claim weakened it to the point of sudden collapse?

After it yields

The steel does gain strength after yielding due to the phenomena of strain hardening. It does have to yield first for this to happen. In a tensile test of a wire the stress required to initially yield the wire is lower than that required to continue to stretch it. The force requirement goes up due to strain hardening.

Heat does weaken the steel but after yield, at a given temperature, and once the material is in the plastic region, additional yielding or strain requires higher stress which requires a greater load.

The point made in the paper is that any initial yielding would have caused strain hardening and required more load to move any further at the same temperature, or higher steel temperature to drop the yield point and load requirements further. Since the load could not be increased in the case of the towers, it would require additional heating of the steel. This all takes time and would be visible if that is what was really happening.

Buildings Just Fall Down Sometimes...

Buildings just fall down sometimes:
Also see the related stories on the right hand side.

Buildings just fall down sometimes when they are built in third world countries where they use shoddy building practices and ignore the building codes. Oh and they also just fall down in New York. Yeah right.

Great consise paper

I especially love the last sentence:

"The case that the NIST report must be corrected is confirmed. If this report is not corrected
the suspicion will remain that its purpose was not so much to inform as to deceive."