Projection Of Steel And Concrete... Options

[Truthseekers]

Have been watchin 911 mysteries, and have noticed steel and concrete being blown upwards at 11:45 onwards.
It is even clearer that a substantial energy force caused this. There is only one way to go for a skyscraper collapsing, and that is down, every bit of it, but parts going upwards???

Anyone noticed this? (To the right)

[heliweli]

Yep. Very strange. Not at all what one would expect from a straightforward collapse.

[carlos727]

Please read this, written by EXPERTS on the matter.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%...209-8-06%20.pdf

[grizz]

Yeah, we've seen that, carlos. Thanks.

[maturin42]

Please read this, written by EXPERTS on the matter.

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%...209-8-06%20.pdf

Oh, Thank You, Carlos! My eyes are open now and I can see things right! How could I ever have believed my lying eyes in the first place? The steel beams ejected 500 feet were optical illusions caused by air pressure, or something, and those loud booms and big explosions, especially the one that signaled Bldg 7's classic Las Vegas dive were not what I might have thought. That huge BOOM! that rippled the windows and collapsed the penthouse must have been a Rudy Giuiliani fart! BBC's premature announcement of Solomon Brothers Building collapse was a function of a slight flaw in the space-time continuum, yeah, that's the ticket..yessss!

[Nunyabiz]

Blanchard is a "Self proclaimed expert" that is clearly one of 2 things.
1. a Lying shill spewing pure BS so Protec can get Government contracts.
2. a Complete freaking idiot.

Take your pick.

http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/blanchard/index.html

Blanchard is just a "Photographer" as far as I can tell, in fact he has no verifiable documentation of any kind as to his alleged "expertise".

Here is a quote from the website he edits.

""When the excitement of the blast is over, a large, billowing cloud of dust is one of the most identifiable characteristics of a successful project."

Ya mean like this? (IMG:http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/docs/nt_dust_aerial2s.jpg)

His BS article he wrote is nothing but a collection of opinions with ZERO support for a word of it.

Maybe Photography Magazine will "peer review" Blanchards "paper" until then I will give more credence towards Steven Jones peer reviewed papers.

This post has been edited by Nunyabiz: Apr 9 2008, 10:30 AM

[mrodway]

I could not be bothered reading any further after reading his first point where he implied that a controlled demolition could only commence from a low level floor.

You may as well say it wasn't a controlled demolition because they didn't cordon off the area first.

The "paper" justs appears to be a plug for his business.

This post has been edited by mrodway: Apr 9 2008, 10:09 AM

[Truthseekers]

That implosions report is a load of gash. You simly cannot allay default CD policy to the WTC because those two towers are far too high for the normal start at bottom CD. In fact, if they knew anything of the design of the towers, they would notice they were built in such a way that they are 3 sectioned towers. If you notice, the squibs visible during the collapse start the bottom sections of each individual tower section. So, if you want to argue the 'start at bottom' theory, then that theory has been proven to be the case as noticed during the CD of the twin towers. Observe the video, and you will see the CD does start at the bottom of each individual 3 tiered sections of the WTC1 and 2. Further explosions in the basement to blast out the ground support of the inner core and further explosions visible by squibs in other areas of the WTC. Allay it akin to pulling the inside of a bannana out and watch the skin pull down and as it is pulled down, the skin projects outwards. Exactly as shown in the collapses. It was CD, end of.

Despite any possible argument to debunk CD, the WTC was not built with its foundations in the sky. If they were, a camera man would be placed upside down and everything would look like it is going upwards.

There is no denying the fact that if every single building on earth collapsed together at the same time, not one of them would have any debris going upwards. The energy of gravity is down. Never up.

This post has been edited by Truthseekers: Apr 9 2008, 04:26 PM

[Sanders]

...You may as well say it wasn't a controlled demolition because they didn't cordon off the area first.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)

Good one.


In a classic demolition, you aren't worried about what it "looks like" ... you time the charges from the bottom up. That doesn't mean it can't be done the other way around. ...But you all knew that.

[dMz]

See WTC1 North Tower video analyses at:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10742223

WTC2 South Tower video analysis is at:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10742227

He even estimates/calculates the horizontal velocity. Thanks again to David Chandler and AE911Truth.org

Some related resources can be found at:

Post #27 regarding projectile motion calculations
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10741178

Post #34 on same thread as above link:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10741194

http://www.cloakanddagger.de/_Grossmann/27..._Ton_Detail.htm

http://www.cloakanddagger.de/_Grossmann/27...ns_Sideways.htm

Original FEMA photo of [300 ton by my math] debris [in AMEX Building (World Financial Center 3 / WFC3 )]
http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photolibr...ails.do?id=3942

[dMz]

More related info is also at "Fires in WTC7 Before WTC1N "Collapse" post #18:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10746307

Evidence Of Controlled Demolition?
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=2163

[dMz]

OK- now for the "how far from WTC1N to WTC7" question. I had obtained approx. 320 feet earlier from a NOAA overlay in Google Earth. This time, I imported Fig. 2-1 of NIST NCSTAR1-1 for CAD analysis. I scaled this bitmap to the diagonals and sides of the irregular trapezoidal World Trade Center Plaza (with distances taken from Google Earth for these 4 intersections). The approximate GPS latitude and longitude of these 4 intersections can be found at:

Post #3
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10743128

Of course working from bitmapped graphics to vector graphics is subjective due to the thickness of the heavy bitmapped lines when zooming in and is IMPERFECT (*** DEBUNKERS TAKE NOTE ***), but most of the aerial photographs taken pre-9/11 that I've seen have considerable parallax, and are unsuitable for my purposes here. My WTC7 vector drawing was concentrated more towards the 330 foot E-W "width" and 140 foot N-S dimension adapted from NIST NCSTAR1-1, page xxxvii.

Using this method, I get a "nearest approach" of approximately 360 feet [~110 m] from the north face of WTC1N to the south face of WTC7. The astute reader will note that this distance is greater than the 330 foot dimension of the WTC7 building itself.

Here is the imported drawing with bitmap:

http://www.orbitfiles.com/download/id3103378733.html

And here is the WTC1 to WTC7 distance drawing with the NIST bitmap layer turned off:

http://www.orbitfiles.com/download/id3103377879.html

NIST NCSTAR 1-1
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-1.pdf

-------------------------------------------
EDIT: Based upon the damage recorded in the Aman Zafar photo "wtc-110.jpg" posted at:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10742206

I estimate the highest WTC7 damage on floor 45 (of 47). 45/47 * 610 feet high is 610. - 25.96 feet = 584.04 feet [or 178.015392 m]. This would be 758. + 25.96 feet = 783.96 feet [or 238.951 m] of vertical "drop" below the roof of WTC1N.

Time of trajectory to WTC7 from:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/traj.html#tra11

time (of fall to 45th WTC7 floor) = sqrt ( 2h/g ) = sqrt (2*238.951 m / 9.80665 m/sec^2 ) = sqrt (48.7324417615 sec^2) = 6.9808625371 sec.

Now for the horizontal velocity component:

v_0 = range / sqrt (2h/g) [or v_x=x/t] v_x = 368.25 ft / 6.9808625371 sec = 52.7513610307 ft/sec horizontal velocity component. This is equivalent to 16.0786148421 m/sec, or 35.9668370664 mph horizontal velocity (neglecting air drag).

NOTE: This is the MINIMUM velocity possible to hit the 45th floor of WTC7 from roof debris of WTC1N. If that debris striking the 45th floor of WTC7 came from a lower floor of WTC1N, then a higher horizontal velocity would be necessary (as there would be less "drop time" down to WTC7's 45th floor).

The obvious question is what force imparted a horizontal velocity >= 35.97 mph to WTC1N debris of sufficient mass and strength to fly at least 368.25 feet horizontally and do the damage observed at the 45th floor of WTC7 and down in the photograph linked above?

Here is the "left view" of [L to R]: WTC7, WTC1N, and WTC2 So that I used for this calculation:
http://www.orbitfiles.com/download/id3104724773.html

EDIT2: Oblique angles or anything but a "closest approach" perpendicular debris path from WTC1N to WTC7's 45th floor will also require a higher horizontal velocity.

[dMz]

I updated my spreadsheet on "gravitational" drop of WTC1N debris and the observed damage to the SW corner of WTC7 at or near the 45th floor. All calculations/approximations use the approach in the few recent posts above.

As you can see, debris from the mid-to-lower WTC1N floors would need some very high horizontal velocities, as the debris would have less time to "fall vertically" compared to the WTC1N upper floors. Again, these are minimum horizontal velocities needed (in mph), assuming a "best case" perpendicular debris path from the north face of WTC1N to the SW corner of WTC7 at/near the 45th floor.

Attached is the chart.
http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wtc7velchartkl8.jpg

Here is is at a better image server:
http://flickcabin.com/public/view/18982

Fullsize
http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/18982

[dMz]

Some resources on World Financial Center 3 (WFC3) or the American Express building.

"Part of The World Financial Center

200 Vesey Street, American Express

See the map of the area
http://www.wirednewyork.com/wtc/wtc_map.htm

A solid pyramid top
Height: 225.5 m [739.8293963255 feet]
Floors over ground: 54
Erected: 1985
Architects: Cesar Pelli & Associates and Adamson & Assocs"

http://www.wirednewyork.com/wfc/3wfc/default.htm

http://www.cgaux1sr.org/photo/WTC/P00Web04837.jpg
(IMG:http://www.cgaux1sr.org/photo/WTC/P00Web04837.jpg)

http://www.cgaux1sr.org/photo/WTC/P000Web6004836.jpg
(IMG:http://www.cgaux1sr.org/photo/WTC/P000Web6004836.jpg)

404:
http://911digitalarchive.org/crr/images/CR...uments/3424.htm

Hmmm, FEMA's 404 too:
http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm

Dr. Grossmann's Paper
http://www.gallerize.com/9-11/911_Science_Report_App_A.pdf

[pg. 1] "Herein: Loads of forensic data ignored by the government and mainstream media. Such
as: A 600,000 pound (270 metric ton) steel beam flew through the air for 390 feet and
struck deep inside a neighboring building. The energy it takes is more than to launch two
Boeing 767-200 planes. Before 9:00 a.m., the lobby of WTC7 exploded which was the
reason for evacuating this building. Many witnesses heard, saw and felt huge explosions
in the towers and underground. Heavy debris rained over hundreds of acres damaging
buildings like from an erupting „mini-volcano“. This forgotten evidence points to gigantic
internal explosions inside the World Trade Center. This evidence gives a clear
interpretation to the scientifically clear seismic recordings of Richter scale 2.2
underground explosions instants before each of the twin towers fell. This has never been
compiled before in this form. With a witness list including 141 entries, several of these
are links to other older witness lists. Incriminating with relation to a governmental mass
murder."

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch2.htm

http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/urich/MassAndPeWtc1.htm

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/...assAndPeWtc.pdf
-----------------------------------

Post #31 to 34
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10741184

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photolibr...ails.do?id=3942

"Photograph by Michael Rieger taken on 09/18/2001 in New York"
(IMG:http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/low/3942.jpg)

http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photodata/original/3942.jpg

"New York, NY, September 18, 2001 -- Ohio Task Force workers anchored this 600,000 pound beam from the World Trade Center lodged in a nearby building. Photo by Michael Rieger/ FEMA News Photo"

*WTC-82.jpg

EDIT: *** Does anyone know or have access to accurate information for the height above ground level of that highest damage shown in the photo above? *** [I'm in the process of estimating/scaling from some photos right now]

EDIT2: More WFC3 links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_World_Financial_Center

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=248/

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=3world...yorkcity-ny-usa

Reason for edit: Added WFC3 links

[amazed!]

Awesome work dMole! (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif)

[dMz]

A P4T forum "regular" asked me a good question about the 600Klb "chunk" and my velocity calculations.

The answer is that I haven't done anything with the 600,000 lb (300 "short" ton or 270? metric ton) value. I just posted references for that.

The important part to note is that "projectile" mass doesn't matter in any of the projectile equations linked to university physics pages above- HEIGHT does! This decides the "time of fall," range traveled, etc.

******
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/traj.html#tra11
******

My charts (esp. post #13 above) DO NOT apply to the AMEX WFC3 600 Klb FEMA "chunk"- I do and would need some height data for WFC3 to do that (and it is a fairly quick calculation).

d

EDIT: Now if one is referring to the ENERGY, POWER, or MOMENTUM of the projectile quantities quickly and loosely referred to above, then YES mass does figure in. Also, I'm leaving one low "dangling fruit" here- hoping someone else grabs it for me.

EDIT2: ENERGY, POWER, and MOMENTUM all were responsible for the "penetrating" damage observed at WTC7 and WFC3!

EDIT3: Nearly everything one ever needed to know about trajectories (neglecting air drag):

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/traj.html#tracon

Reason for edit: E, P, p and projectile link(s)

[dMz]

Now for the horizontal velocity component:

v_0 = range / sqrt (2h/g) [or v_x=x/t] v_x = 368.25 ft / 6.9808625371 sec = 52.7513610307 ft/sec horizontal velocity component. This is equivalent to 16.0786148421 m/sec, or 35.9668370664 mph horizontal velocity (neglecting air drag).

NOTE: This is the MINIMUM velocity possible to hit the 45th floor of WTC7 from roof debris of WTC1N. If that debris striking the 45th floor of WTC7 came from a lower floor of WTC1N, then a higher horizontal velocity would be necessary (as there would be less "drop time" down to WTC7's 45th floor).

The obvious question is what force imparted a horizontal velocity >= 35.97 mph to WTC1N debris of sufficient mass and strength to fly at least 368.25 feet horizontally and do the damage observed at the 45th floor of WTC7 and down in the photograph linked above?
...
EDIT2: Oblique angles or anything but a "closest approach" perpendicular debris path from WTC1N to WTC7's 45th floor will also require a higher horizontal velocity.

According to point 3 of NIST's new FAQ that accompanies their new NCSTAR1-9,

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factshe..._qa_082108.html

from post #38:
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10749887

"What caused the fires in WTC 7?
Debris from the collapse of WTC 1, which was 370 feet to the south, ignited fires on at least 10 floors in the building at its south and west faces. However, only the fires on some of the lower floors—7 through 9 and 11 through 13—burned out of control. These lower-floor fires—which spread and grew because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system for these floors had failed—were similar to building fires experienced in other tall buildings. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city’s water supply, whose lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2. These uncontrolled lower-floor fires eventually spread to the northeast part of WTC 7, where the building’s collapse began."

Apparently my NIST bitmap-to-CAD conversion was a little off... I get a difference of -1.75 feet, ratio of -4.7297297297e-3, or -0.473 percent. NIST had a few more people and resources than I have though.