Important notes on the fall rate....

[laughingcat]

Hi all, I'm new to this forum, but certainly not to the 911truth issue....

Regarding the fall rate of the towers, as was posted very recently, it is important to note that this can be addressed in more ways than one. It is also important to note that a concensus figure for the times of total collapse has not been conclusively established, owing mostly to the huge dust clouds that blocked the view of the latter stages of collapse. This has been used by proponents of the official story to ctriticise our analysis of the fall rates. However, seismic data and eyewitness testimony does suggest that the whole thing was over in not much more than ten seconds. However, the "freefall critique" is only part of the story -

1. The rate of collapse, yes, does suggest almost freefall collapse. This of course suggests that the building structure offered almost no resistance. Clearly ridiculous.

2. Even if we ASSUME that the building structure offered no resistance to the fall, conservation of momentum ensures that the building could not have pancaked at such a rate. The problem is that as each floor collapses onto the one below, this floor has to actually "push" the next floor down, simply because this floor, like any physical body, has inertia i.e. intrinsic resistance to movement. Thus as each floor pancakes, it is slowed down by the one below. I had a couple of mathematician friends to calculate a rough figure of how this would affect the rate of fall assuming no structural resistance of the building. They both came up with a figure of approx 15secs minimal collapse time. The only way one can circumvent this effect is the blow each floor away as the one above falls i.e. a controlled demolition. This further stretches the official stroy WAY beyond breaking point. Total madness. It is also notable, that Prof Eagar, the "expert" who wrote about the collapse supporting the official story, completely ignores this factor .

3. Finally, the only energy available for the collapse of each building, sticking to the official explanation, is its gravitational potential energy. Unfortunately, as Hoffman has calculated, an enormous amount of energy was used up in pulverising the concrete to literal dust. In fact, he calculates the energy necessary to do this as being 10 times more than the grav pot energy that each building possessed.

.....overall, the fall of those buildings defied the laws of physics on several levels............the difficuly in establishing the precise time of fall should not
be allowed to be utilised as a weakness in any of our criticisms of the fall time. Basically and unquestionably, those buildings fell WAY too fast....

AndrewG