The Physics to Disprove Twin Towers Pancaking

Because it shows teh corruption in the world.. and it exploits those who killed people in the WTC..

they arent rebuilding it either.. it's not going to have the same design plan.. (Why do you think one of the reasons they demolished it was?)

 

I said this so long ago in a topic about 9/11... Annex hasn't created anything, It was a well known fact long ago and documented, just so he doesn't take credit on something big

 

I say what he says..because its over...get your asses into now.

 

check you equation agian, you didn't stay in base units the towers are 1190 feet, 396 meeters. its just a few feet from the origonal height of1727 feet, the 727 can be atributed for using 9 seconds and 9.8 instead of 9.81 as the gravity constant. get the real facts do the math. it ads up.

check the 1727 feet includes the spire the buildign to the roof is realy 1368 feet.

which bring the answer to your equation to be off ny only 200 feet, reasonable for a B+ in my AP physics calss. especialy for such a slopy problem



from wiki
Height
Antenna/Spire 1,727 ft (526.3 m) [1]
Roof 1,368 ft (417.0 m)
Top floor 1,355 ft (413.0 m)

 

Ok then. Btw the equation was to determine the height not to state the exact height as a variable in case you didn't notice. This isn't a conspiracy theory and yes its a documented fact that I didn't make myself, But I sited my source for the equation and therefore it is my own work. By the way why don't you do it for yourself then and also 9.81 rounds to 9.8 if you didn't notice that. Another thing you lack to notice in your statement is in the report of how long the towers took to collapse INCLUDED THE SPIRES. Now im fairly sure that they are well over 200 ft and you didn't even convert from m/s to ft/s making your statement GROSSLY inaccurate and shows why you only got a b+ in AP physics. I have no clue what course it is and what it teaches you but since you are arguing against this I can only be lead to think you are an American. You have a biased view to what happened. I happened to not be affected at all by what happened on 9/11/01 making me able to render an impartial decision, allowing your failure of a statement with NO disproving evidence would simply be a conflict of interest. You also need to improve on your English skills you failed to spell many words correctly and left many grammar errors leading me to believe you probably are around a 40% at the academic level of your English courses or maybe a 60% on the applied level.

What is this 727? How could it be attributed for using 9 seconds if you never stated what it was. If you mean the jet, it was a 767, and how could you attribute that for using 9 seconds? This line makes no sense whatsoever.

Its called rounding and 9.81 isn't even correct if you wanted it to be so specific you would have use the correct speed of gravity which is 9.80665 m/s/s. So have it your way and you a wrong as well.

I have the real facts and I even undershot the truth. It does add up, To the official report being a lie. I'm not out to say conspiracy, but at least make a real fucking report for the memory of the people who died.

I'm sorry I don't use imperial measurements. Its much easier and faster to use metric and almost all of the world is using it. Not only that but wikipedia is an unreliable source of information as I could easily go there now and edit it myself.

Using m/s for a ft/s problem maybe that is so. You also failed to notice the part where they would include the spire in how long it takes to collapse. Why brag about your marks when you fail to spell a simple 6 letter word correctly. Fail.

So anyone who is impartial to what occurred that day if you can disprove what I proved I welcome you to, but at least have the decency to spell words correctly and use correct grammar unlike this patriot here who apparently picks up in science where he fails in english.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well watch a controlled demolition, You will see the floors falling out from below, shit will go flying out the windows, and many other similarities to what happened. I'm not trying to say it was a controlled demolition but more there needs to be a new report made about what happened no more bullshit.

So you're saying that the wind in New York would do this

Thats the only way the wind would affect the time of the tower falling. Other than that it would simply push it to a small angle. Also same with the force of a plane. Its not like the fucking plane flew away with the tower on its roof. The building structure IF ANYTHING would help SLOW it down not speed a collapse up and if you were just listing some why don't you list variables that actually matter.

It truly didn't "Pancake" as the floors below would have impeded the speed of the collapse if it really was to pancake. Something obviously helped bring the towers down. I am going to believe this until someone proves otherwise who's opinion isn't a conflict of interest.

 

If you knew anything about physics you'd know you need to look at mass to calculate terminal velocity...

Terminal Velocity = mg

Or..... It could just be that you didn't take into account the margin or error.

Lets assume 9.2s instead of 9.0s

Dx = 0.5(-9.8(9.2)2)
Dx = 0.5(-9.8(84.64)
Dx = 0.5(-829.472)
Dx = -414.736

That would lead us to believe that the height of the WTC would be 414.736 meters

A quick wikipedia confirms that these results are a lot more accurate.

Top floor 1,355 ft (413.0 m)

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

You can make it something like 9.22 to reach the Roof instead of the top floor.

So basically Annex, you proved nothing.

WAIT... Your taking a university level Physics course and you couldn't figure out what was wrong with his equation?

Not to mention the time doesn't include the antenna as if you look at any video you can't see it.

 

Are you a moron? You dont think a jumbo jet, filled with jet fuel would EXPLODE under them flames? what the hell is wrong with you?

And I think it is your innate stupidity that makes up obserd false conspiracy theorys.

And 10m;s of thousands saw explosions, because they were there moron, of course a jet fueld plane is going to explode, use common sense ffs.

No, I am saying wind, along with hundreds of other factors would add up.

And as for the controlled demolition theory. Of course their will be dozens of similarities. Why? Because it is theoretically, a bomb (the jumbo jet) and under extreme heat and pressure, OBVIOUSLY things will be going out windows.

There is almost no way to persuade you, nor anyone else, for several different reasons. One being, some people are just extremely stubborn and once they have an idea, their stuck to it. Another is some people like to be against the 'croud' simply to argue. And with you, I can tell you like numbers. It is not easy to put numbers on a jumbo jet going into the towers, without re-enacting it with proper technology inside the plane and tower, Thus, I can not give you any figures on how to make my point, Just facts, And common knowledge.

 

How ignorant...
And give him a break on the English, it's his second language I believe. Is it yours? If not, shut up.

 

I was speaking of the fact that people are quick to deny conspiracies because they make them feel unsafe in their homes. To think that their government has destroyed their families is simply baffling to them. That is not innately stupid, it is obvious. But the people who claim it are also the kind of people that wouldn't kill their own dog if it bit their leg off.

Bloody americans.


Yes, Jet fuel WOULD explode.


I was stating that there were explosions UP AND DOWN the building, not just where the fucking plane crashed . Look at the videos and you'll see what I'm talking about

 

It is baffling because it wouldn't occur. 95% of the conspiracies made up, are based on nothing. The other 5% are things that scientifically COULD happen, but are very small possibilities. It is bladently obvious that the planes hit it, And today, Mohammad admitted to being the one behind the plots, along with several other failed missions.

I have veiwed several different videos, Several different angles, and all of them show an explosion only where the plane enters, and obviously it spreads after time, But there was no explosion up and down the building.

 

It is. My first language was more or less a modified version of french called patois, but I actually paid attention in ESL classes through out elementary school and they deemed me fit enough to try regular stream english for high school and how does that affect anything.

Who the fuck is Mohammad? You surely mean Usama bin laden? Not this mysterious Mohammad with no last name? I just can't seem to comprehend why you would try to convince me that math is wrong and the government is always right, when you don't even remember who the person who claimed responsibility was

Proof of any kind? Or is that just your best estimate?

 

No, I do not mean Usama Bin Laden, lmfao. You think he is the only person in the world who is a terrorist? Think again, K? And as for your math, I am not saying it is WRONG I am saying there are OTHER DETERMINING VARIABLES AND FACTORS YOU DID NOT INCLUDE I have said that multiple times already.
Well i figured since you all were 'educated' on this topic you would know who he is, And Mohammad is his last name, But he is the one who was on trial for being the ring leader of setting up the bombs (AKA ALquieda #3), His name is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, And he confessed to 28 planned bombings, and more successful ones. And you can even look on one of your DEMOCRATIC sources to see that, k?

and

What the hell kind of question is that, There is no way to PROVE what percent of conspiracies are made up or not.

 

Then there is no way to state which ones are incorrect in your assumptions .

Smarty pants

 

ok 'smarty pants' I GUARENTEE we all have made estimates, have we not? Or am I the only person to ever make an estimate?

 

back up much? That's not the question at hand here.. You presume that they are all incorrect or false..

Fail.

There have been a MULTITUDE of PROVEN "conspiracies" throughout the world.. Fuck.. Roswell New Mexico..hmm? What's that? Area 51..what REALLY goes on down there??

Hell for that matter.. what the fuck is in space? Dude, everything you see comes from the government.. American government in fact.. You think they're going to tell you everything so you can be as "smart" as they are?

 

I'm going to be cool like you and say "fail" because you fail.

And the only things proven about roswell, was an airport, which the government admitted to before the press release.

I did not say ALL you moron learn to read, i said a percentage, just a guess. And stay on topic. The government does nto tell us EVERYTHING, or even a decent proportion of it. But unless you are a complete moron, They wouldn't have to. The greater majority of us can figure things out ourselves, and there are also plenty of things around you can use to find things out, ex: Media, Library of Congress, Bearuos, etc. And the government (in case you did not know, which I am starting to doubt you know anything except how to type spam to get a post count added) also has rules and regulations to follow.

 

Hmm >.>... Ok, but you said that with confidence.. and tried to make it seem that conspiracies were INCREDIBLY rare occasions and your 5% even stated further that you believe conspiracies aren't true.

They have been happening since the beginning of time..

Hmm <.<....Government owned buildings much??hmm...

You're appearing to be a complete moron who contradicts himself at every turn..

You say they shouldn't have to tell us everything because we can assume? Yet when we assume, we are wrong because of the "conspiracy percentages" you posted? Yet those are not always wrong?... And the government will tell us what we need to know??


You hurt my brain with the incredible pointlessness of your arguements.

Fuck the post count.


Again.. FAIL. Go on, try again.

 

They how could you possibly guess that is what reality is? 86% of Americans rejected the official report on WTC collapse. Are you one of the 14% that think its true because thats how you are acting. You never look at the other side of the story. We all know what the report says.

Also what are these countless other factors. The towers collapsed long after the jets exploded and they were not "Jumbo Jets", they were 767's hardly a jumbo jet. How could NORAD which has the capability to intercept nuclear ICBMs fail to intercept 4 aircraft and WAIT before sending jets to intercept which were fully capable of reaching the aircraft. Also how come WTC7 collapsed in an even fashion when fire was clearly only on one side? Also how was there liquid metal at ground zero after the collapse? Answer all of those then.

 

Annex... don't you EVER read..

It was SHERE coincidence that it happened like that! ^_^!!!lol

Several tests were wrong.. apparently they couldn't withstand plane crashes and temperatures up to 1000 degrees.. and even a highjacked "plane" which did in fact look a lot like a "jet" could destroy a building that quick.. simply amazing.

Not to mention the fact that the pentagon is completely unprotected...hmm

 

Guys...... It's already been proven that it was just a miscalculation on Annex's part.