LinuxQuestions.org
Help answer threads with 0 replies.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


View Poll Results: On 9/11, who and what brought down the World Trade Center?
Al Qaeda terrorists flying hijacked planes, following only Al Qaeda's plan 20 58.82%
Something else. 14 41.18%
Voters: 34. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 10-12-2017, 09:13 AM   #61
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,607
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997

Quote:
Originally Posted by marius162 View Post
Where else should they have fallen? In the western culture we entertain a tradition of building houses
upright, pointing straight away from the mass center of the earth. The towers dropping into their
footprints only proves that gravity pulled them there as it was supposed to do.
Try this, Marius: set up a tall stack of dominoes, then hit it at the top and try to make it fall "within its own footprint." It will never happen: the dominoes will be scattered across the floor as they strike one another on the way down. Furthermore, if you repeat the process several times, the dominoes will fall in very different and unpredictable patterns each time.

As every practitioner of controlled demolition knows, you must remove everything that the falling debris could fall onto, so that the highest portion drops straight down (as, yes, gravity "is supposed to do") with nothing down there standing in the way. The objective is not only to demolish the structure thoroughly, but to "put it all right there in a neat little pile."

"Demolition fail" videos on YouTube would be comical if people didn't die as rigid structures fall over, or sometimes cartwheel end-over-end, when the (conventional) explosives don't go off in exactly the right sequence. We've also seen debris being ejected from the sides and thrown (with sometimes deadly effect) for many blocks. Spectators "a safe distance away" are suddenly running for their lives, on camera. The process is so uncertain that, in fact, in Japan they are right now dismantling a building, one floor at a time from the ground up: the building is gradually getting shorter and shorter. They have chosen not to risk explosive demolition in this overcrowded area. (And they're finding that they can re-sell the (undamaged) building materials, too!)

The "WTC #7" job is much more visibly "classic demolition" (although once again, TNT was apparently not used), but this building was much shorter and you could see the whole thing from the camera angle. Despite the known presence of an armored command-center on the middle floors, it all simply melts away, and with precisely the timing that it would have to do. (The penthouse falls first.) To me, it is absolutely unbelievable that the "blows" of #1 and #2 were successfully accomplished at all. As I said, "this was the work of a true master," using exotic materials, and there just can't be that many companies on Earth who had the capability to do it. Let alone the diabolical skill to do it perfectly, three times in a row.

Yes, I am quite sure that the US Government knows a great deal more than it is letting on. And, as I also said, "I understand why." I would make it ##TOP SECRET## also.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 10-12-2017 at 09:20 AM.
 
Old 10-12-2017, 09:25 AM   #62
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware has beern Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,498

Rep: Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458
ummm... sundialsvcs... the formula for kinetic energy is 1/2 the mass times THE SQUARE of the velocity. Dominoes being very low mass and falling an inch or two will not develop kinetic energy even an order of magnitude less than concrete and steel falling 10 feet or more. It is many orders of magnitude less and not at all analogous.

Try instead gluing several dominoes together into a block and dropping them on your "house of cards" from say 20-30 feet up. Instead of a loose stack also glue your domino target together. Then you might get close even though wooden dominoes are far more resilient than concrete. You are aware of the fact that 2 x 4s, even straw, has pierced concrete walls from the velocity of tornado winds, right?
 
Old 10-12-2017, 03:07 PM   #63
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,607
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997
Let's not take my analogy too far. The point that I intended to make was not that "buildings act like dominoes," but rather that a stack of falling objects will be deflected on the way down by whatever is beneath it.

We all saw that the building did not "pancake," as it would if top-level weights were falling onto lower ones and causing them, in turn, to collapse. (That would have taken longer.) Furthermore, nothing diverted anything, in any direction. (With very few exceptions, and those "exceptions" were handfuls of beams that were ejected sideways with tremendous force.)

Had any building "pancaked," we would have seen a dramatically different implosion-pattern, and something would have thrown it off-balance. The simple fact that this never happened, three times in a row, takes us straight back to ... only one ... credible explanation. "Like it or not."

Two of the tallest buildings on Earth collapsed neatly into their own footprint with a pyroclastic flow. Then, a full six hours later, the very building which contained New York City's super-outpost for dealing with such catastrophes, which had been struck by nothing at all, suddenly melted away in textbook-perfect fashion.

And so, when the truth of what must have happened here fully sinks in, along with a list of the other critical 'protections of society' that were also thoroughly compromised on that fateful morning, it's easy (to me) to see why the lid of State Secrecy was promptly slammed-shut over the whole thing. Full disclosure of everything that might be known, by those who are privy to other secrets, would necessarily compromise those secrets, and thereby expose a great many people to danger from the sort of psychopaths who could ... and did ... "do this."

This was no "act of terrorism." "C'est la guerre."

We disagree, and we need spend no more time persuading one another.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 10-12-2017 at 03:12 PM.
 
Old 10-12-2017, 10:35 PM   #64
jefro
Moderator
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Posts: 17,101

Rep: Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552Reputation: 2552
"If airplane fuel could bring down a skyscraper, the Empire State Building would have toppled when a bomber hit it."

Lightweight in comparison WW2 bomber with almost no fuel has about 1/30 of the jumbo jet kinetic energy. The nearly full fuel amount on the jets created what tends to happen in high speed jet crashes. The famous test NASA did on a jet trying out the so called safe fuel will show the fireball effect. The second part of this is the massive structure that Empire has. It is way over built. The old style firebreaks were more reliable.
The Twin Towers like many things build after 1960 were built to the very minimum. The fire protection on the structure was banned well before this. They sprayed water based junk on to steel. Steel condensates and the stuff falls off. The unique structure of the towers meant that it had no place to go but into it's own foot print.

Sad part of this is everyone believes the kooks who tried to destroy the towers with a truck bomb a few years earlier.


Always nice to see a good safe crash. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstro...-003-dfrc.html This misting of fuel is also the basis for the French's "poor mans nuclear bomb".

Last edited by jefro; 10-12-2017 at 10:37 PM.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 01:56 AM   #65
marius162
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Apr 2015
Posts: 11

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
Try this, Marius: set up a tall stack of dominoes
Bad analogy but maybe still workable. The WTC towers were made of steel frames around the thin air of the living quarters. If we built a model of WTC 1 at the scale of, say, 1/10: 137 feet x 21 ft x 21 ft
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:W...rangment_m.svg
made of dominoes each set on top of another on their smallest sides and with the mass of the dominoes at the center because there was the part of the construction which actually carried the towers and if our model is hit in a way corresponding to 9/11, then the majority of the dominoes will fall into the footprint of our model, even though their physical properties do no even vaguely resemble those of the steel tubes of the WTC towers.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 05:09 AM   #66
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware has beern Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,498

Rep: Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
Let's not take my analogy too far. The point that I intended to make was not that "buildings act like dominoes," but rather that a stack of falling objects will be deflected on the way down by whatever is beneath it.

We all saw that the building did not "pancake," as it would if top-level weights were falling onto lower ones and causing them, in turn, to collapse. (That would have taken longer.) Furthermore, nothing diverted anything, in any direction. (With very few exceptions, and those "exceptions" were handfuls of beams that were ejected sideways with tremendous force.)

Had any building "pancaked," we would have seen a dramatically different implosion-pattern, and something would have thrown it off-balance. The simple fact that this never happened, three times in a row, takes us straight back to ... only one ... credible explanation. "Like it or not."
No. They won't. At least not necessarily. That "necessarily" point has to do somewhat with the nature of the material falling (1/2 Mass) with how fast it is falling/moving (V^2 ...that's Velocity Squared). If you do the math, and I have, but more importantly experts who have a reference point for such high levels of energy have, the resulting numbers are just colossal. I'm not quoting those numbers because they have little physical meaning to me and I expect the same is true for most here.

The best way I can communicate such energies is by events you may have actually experienced. Have you ever not seen or misjudged the distance to a concrete abutment, light pole, tree, or any relatively unmovable object while parking your car and hit it at say 2 mph? If you have you have felt the incredibly potential energy of motion. It is usually quite startling how much force there is even at such low velocities. Now consider that at 4 mph that force is not twice as much but 4 times as much and a mere 8 mph is 16 times as much and we haven't even gotten to 10mph yet!*

Now also consider the nature of combustibles. One cannot light a lump of coal with a cardboard safety match... a wooden kitchen match, maybe, but grind it onto dust and blow it through a straw (aerate it) and a spark will cause it to light, and the heat will spread so fast and intensely it will explode, If I recall my college chemistry correctly the nature of explosives is this: 2 lbs of explosive is not twice as powerful as 1 lb but rather eight (8) times as powerful.

When we combine all of the above forces, and they did all occur in both towers on 9/11 (even the blowing through a straw effect) the energies involved is absolutely staggering. However lets just focus on the falling object forces mentioned in this latest post.

First let me say that it is highly unlikely anyone on this forum has ever witnessed, in person, the magnitude of energies of which we are speaking and by a very wide margin. Most of us may have been pelted by a pebble or small rock. That might sting a bit if say someone throws one at you. It might take out your soft tissue eye if it was kicked up by a spinning wheel of a car. It might put a half-dollar sized break in your windshield if one hits your windshield at 30 mph or go right through even safety glass at 100 mph.

If you're changing a tire and the jack pops out and the wheel, plus a ton of car or so, lands on your foot as you might imagine even falling just 4 inches it will crush your foot, and that's if the inflated tire is the contact surface. If instead it is a raw steel rim or the more solid brake drum, there won't be much identifiable of your foot left. If the whole car dropped 10 feet and landed on you, the result would be instant liquification of most of your body parts. Now stack 10,000 or 50,000 cars on top of each other and have them fall 10 feet onto a human body. Now we are getting within an order of magnitude of the forces involved here but as you might already see, we cannot possibly imagine 50,000 cars. Most humans have difficulty visualizing numbers greater than 20 and the error factor grows exponentially with higher numbers.

You are absolutely correct that the collapses resemble controlled demolition because the only difference is the intent and planning or lack of it. Nobody, not one person on planet Earth, has ever demolished a building even 25% as tall as WTC AND nobody has ever chosen to do even those 1/5th as tall slowly but the concept of weakening the structure until it collapses in on itself is essentially identical.

Now if you think that your conclusion is the only possible conclusion you are not only mistaken, your conclusion was in essence aready made and completely unassailable by any actual evidence. You would have, and likely did, grasp at the flimsiest of straws to support your foregone conclusion. As I pointed out earlier, even straws can pierce concrete when propelled at sufficient velocity.

So for the sake of argument, in the interest of reason, please at least just admit that simpler explanations are possible. The building doesn't care how the structure is weakened. It will succumb to gravity just as readily, regardless of the means.

*Edit - Thanks to dogpatch who saw my hurried math error, my numbers have been edited and corrected. The car example numbers were sadly off by a factor of 2. Now the progression is correct. The remaining numbers are correct as originally posted.

Last edited by enorbet; 10-13-2017 at 08:41 PM.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 11:14 AM   #67
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,607
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997Reputation: 2997
Enorbet, let's table this.

I understand your position and you understand mine. This was an act of War, and a thorough compromise of ... not only the airline security system, but New York City!

If you accept the cover-story, it really only makes the magnitude and the implication of the event only very-slightly less intolerable. And, if you do not ... ... "well, anyway.™"

Certainly more than enough justification to create and to promote a suitable(?) cover story, and to elicit the testimony of however-many engineering experts in order to "sell it." And then to keep "what you actually know" forevermore Top Secret.

The perpetrators already knew far, far too much. They don't need to know a wretched thing about what we have subsequently discovered, nor about what we have subsequently done. And the slightest discussion of such things to John Q Public, albeit with the worthy goal of assuaging his fears of walking into a high-rise building tomorrow morning, would reveal too much more.

And so it goes: "Yep, the airplanes did it, and nothing more. You strip-search yourself going through airport security now, and that Protects You." That's all you get. That's all you're ever gonna get. And, just maybe, "with very good reason."

"Don't Ask. Don't Tell.™"

This was an Act of War, such as the world has never before seen and must never see again.
  • Sometimes, "you need to know, and you're entitled to know."
  • But Sometimes, "you need not(!) to know."
  • "Loose Lips Sink Ships!™"
  • Knowledge Is Power.™

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 10-13-2017 at 11:19 AM.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 12:46 PM   #68
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,621

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
I have no idea why any company that had the technical capability to do it – knowing damn well what a very-tiny company they keep – would not immediately go to the FBI on the very first suggestion of such an incomprehensibly heinous act.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
This is why I think that the US Government does know who must have done it: there aren't that many companies on this planet who have access to this sort of thing and the expertise to use them. And to be at the very top of their game. (If you can accomplish this, you're a master.)
Hold it. You think the conspirators outsourced this to a private construction company?

Well then. I can think of someone who obviously has intimate professional knowledge of every construction company in New York. Someone who has lots and lots of money. I think you know who I'm talking about. He has since become President.

EDIT: I also want to double-check my understanding of your position. It's that the U.S. government didn't necessarily(?) do it, but they know which Americans did it and they're convering that up, right?

Last edited by dugan; 10-13-2017 at 06:22 PM.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 12:57 PM   #69
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware has beern Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,498

Rep: Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458
OK, sundialsvcs, so you won't consider any conclusion other than "Inside Job". I will "table it" as regards quoting your posts here but I must say I am disappointed even if not altogether surprised. While still horrific we should expect attacks from our enemies. We shouldn't even need to consider attacks from inside. I don't find enemy attacks only "slightly less intolerable".

Additionally I think "such as the world has never before seen" is substantially over the top. You actually think 9/11 was worse than say, Dresden? or Nagasaki? the Holocaust? the Armenian Genocide? There are countless more but those, IMHO, are a few recent examples certainly at least on a par with 9/11, and really, to my mind, far worse.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 01:09 PM   #70
jsbjsb001
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: hopefully somewhere on earth? ;)
Distribution: Whatever Linux distro that suits my needs!
Posts: 720

Rep: Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381
sundialsvcs, Do you think it had to have been an "inside job" purely because of the scale of 9/11 and therefore al-qaeda could not have had the "know how" (and/or the will) to do it?

As I wonder, what makes you so sure it had to have been an "inside job".
 
Old 10-13-2017, 01:13 PM   #71
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,621

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 View Post
As I wonder, what makes you so sure it had to have been an "inside job".
Because the building collapse didn't look like a stack of dominoes falling on a table.

Last edited by dugan; 10-13-2017 at 04:50 PM.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 01:25 PM   #72
dugan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 7,621

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948Reputation: 2948
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
No, I'm convinced they hit. But I didn't mention hit and detonation being instantaneous - that might have looked even more suspicious.
Adopt the mindset of the "inside-job" conspirators. You know the terrorists plan. You want to escalate the "War On Terror". You devise a way to make an atrocity even more atrocious. It worked.
How did the explosives survive the fire?

Or did they carefully plant the explosives only on floors that they knew would not be affected by the fire?

Also: how long do you think the planning for this took? If it's a year or more, then it would have had to have been initiated during the Clinton Administration.

Last edited by dugan; 10-13-2017 at 01:36 PM.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 04:47 PM   #73
dogpatch
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Central America
Distribution: Mepis, Android
Posts: 267
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
No. They won't. At least not necessarily. That "necessarily" point has to do somewhat with the nature of the material falling (1/2 Mass) with how fast it is falling/moving (V^2 ...that's Velocity Squared). If you do the math, and I have, but more importantly experts who have a reference point for such high levels of energy have, the resulting numbers are just colossal. I'm not quoting those numbers because they have little physical meaning to me and I expect the same is true for most here.

The best way I can communicate such energies is by events you may have actually experienced. Have you ever not seen or misjudged the distance to a concrete abutment, light pole, tree, or any relatively unmovable object while parking your car and hit it at say 2 mph? If you have you have felt the incredibly potential energy of motion. It is usually quite startling how much force there is even at such low velocities. Now consider that at 4 mph that force is not twice as much but 8 times as much and a mere 8 mph is 32 times as much and we haven't even gotten to 10mph yet!
Perhaps a minor point, but your math is incorrect. V^2 would mean that at twice the speed there would be 4 times the force, not 8 times. Four times the speed would be 16 times the force, not 32 times. Are you quite sure the rest of your engineering math is accurate? Just asking.

Last edited by dogpatch; 10-13-2017 at 04:48 PM. Reason: quoted too much
 
Old 10-13-2017, 05:16 PM   #74
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.2
Posts: 7,557
Blog Entries: 56

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
How did the explosives survive the fire?
Not an expert, guessing could have had fire-resistant shielding of some sort?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
Or did they carefully plant the explosives only on floors that they knew would not be affected by the fire?
Could have. They failed to inform me of their plans and methods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan View Post
Also: how long do you think the planning for this took? If it's a year or more, then it would have had to have been initiated during the Clinton Administration.
They could have planned it as soon as they found out about the terrorist plan to hijack the 'planes and fly them into the towers.
 
Old 10-13-2017, 08:32 PM   #75
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware has beern Main OpSys for decades while testing others to keep up
Posts: 1,498

Rep: Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458Reputation: 1458
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogpatch View Post
Perhaps a minor point, but your math is incorrect. V^2 would mean that at twice the speed there would be 4 times the force, not 8 times. Four times the speed would be 16 times the force, not 32 times. Are you quite sure the rest of your engineering math is accurate? Just asking.
Actually not a minor point at all I messed up big time! It must've been that thick milk shake brain freeze Joking aside, I made the stupid error of comparing the product of the larger to the previous and lower multiplier/multiplicand instead of product to product. Doh! The only other engineering math was for the nature of explosive mass and that is cubed as the mass doubles. I'm a little embarrassed to say so now after such a stupid error but I actually have 2 years of College Engineering and LOTS of Math. Just goes to show you that "Hurry up will most often make you late". Thank you for such a reasonable wake up call. I will correct it now. Thousands of tons falling even 10 feet is still a colossal quantity of kinetic energy but my example that hoped to give a reasonable reference point was horribly in error

Last edited by enorbet; 10-13-2017 at 08:34 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: London Stock Exchange smashes world record trade speed with Linux LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 10-20-2010 10:50 AM
LXer: Linux interoperability takes center stage at TechX World LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 11-04-2006 05:21 AM
Moment of silence - World Trade Center and Pentagon jeremy General 25 10-01-2001 05:20 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration