http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJFdlaUZT3M&eurl=http%3A%2F%2
It is my understanding that this is an animation of NIST's Flight 175 / WTC2 impact analysis, still pictures of which were posted earlier at this blog.
I'm posting these for physicist "hsgsj", with whom I am engaged in argument about whether these images are physical, starting at the bottom of the below 911blogger page with the comment "Good thing this is not baseball. Strike five":
http://911blogger.com/node/8487#comment-142903
I think I'm still swinging, with one strike against me because he is correct that I misinterpreted the NIST report on tail deceleration.
Click for a larger view.
2 comments:
i am afraid sir that the NIST animation is nonsense. it shows the nosecone already inside the wtc as if by magic. if "physicist hsgsj" is defending it then he is "skipping a step" so to speak.
anyone who purports to discuss the physics of a REAL 767 penetrating a wtc must start at the very beginning of the first moment of contact between the two.
IN WHAT MANNER does the smooth rounded lightweight plastic nosecone of the thin walled lightweight aluminum fuselage of a real 767 penetrate thru the massive steel box columns and 5' wide steel spandrel plates not to mention the horizontal steel reinforced concrete floor slabs of a wtc?
does it:
A) cut thru like a blade?
B) bludgeon thru like a hammer?
newton's 3rd law:
for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
this means that if a 767 is hitting a wtc with a force equivalent to x then the wtc is also hitting the 767 with the same force equivalent to x.
it boils down to the phrase:
ALUMINUM/PLASTIC 767 -vs- STEEL/CONCRETE WTC.
it is indeed as simple as that.
^ha.
I agree. Every paper I have seen on the subject that discloses its assumptions tells me that the assumptions "skip a step" on this.
Post a Comment