In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
accurately accounts for the collapse times of the World Trade Center
towers. A top-down controlled demolition can be simply characterized
as a "pancake collapse" of a building missing its support columns.
This demolition profile requires that the support columns holding a
floor be destroyed just before that floor is collided with by the
upper falling masses. The net effect is a pancake-style collapse at
near free fall speed.
This model predicts a WTC 1 collapse time of 11.38 seconds, and a WTC
2 collapse time of 9.48 seconds. Those times accurately match the
seismographic data of those events.1 Refer to equations (1.9) and
(1.10) for details.
It should be noted that this model differs massively from the "natural
pancake collapse" in that the geometrical composition of the structure
is not considered (as it is physically destroyed). A natural pancake
collapse features a diminishing velocity rapidly approaching rest due
the resistance offered by the columns and surrounding "steel mesh".
DEMOLITION MODEL
A top-down controlled demolition of a building is considered as
follows
1. An initial block of j floors commences to free fall.
2. The floor below the collapsing block has its support structures
disabled just prior the collision with the block.
3. The collapsing block merges with the momentarily levitating floor,
increases in mass, decreases in velocity (but preserves momentum), and
continues to free fall.
4. If not at ground floor, goto step 2.
Let j be the number of floors in the initial set of collapsing floors.
Let N be the number of remaining floors to collapse.
Let h be the average floor height.
Let g be the gravitational field strength at ground-level.
Let T be the total collapse time.
Using the elementary motion equation
distance = (initial velocity) * time + 1/2 * acceleration * time^2
We solve for the time taken by the k'th floor to free fall the height
of one floor
[1.1] t_k=(-u_k+(u_k^2+2gh))/g
where u_k is the initial velocity of the k'th collapsing floor.
The total collapse time is the sum of the N individual free fall times
[1.2] T = sum(k=0)^N (-u_k+(u_k^2+2gh))/g
Now the mass of the k'th floor at the point of collapse is the mass of
itself (m) plus the mass of all the floors collapsed before it (k-1)m
plus the mass on the initial collapsing block jm.
[1.3] m_k=m+(k-1)m+jm =(j+k)m
If we let u_k denote the initial velocity of the k'th collapsing
floor, the final velocity reached by that floor prior to collision
with its below floor is
[1.4] v_k=SQRT(u_k^2+2gh)
which follows from the elementary equation of motion
(final velocity)^2 = (initial velocity)^2 + 2 * (acceleration) *
(distance)
Conservation of momentum demands that the initial momentum of the k'th
floor equal the final momemtum of the (k-1)'th floor.
[1.5] m_k u_k = m_(k-1) v_(k-1)
Substituting (1.3) and (1.4) into (1.5)
[1.6] (j + k)m u_k= (j + k - 1)m SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+ 2gh)
Solving for the initial velocity u_k
[1.7] u_k=(j + k - 1)/(j + k) SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+2gh)
Which is a recurrence equation with base value
[1.8] u_0=0
The WTC towers were 417 meters tall and had 110 floors. Tower 1 began
collapsing on the 93rd floor. Making substitutions N=93, j=17 , g=9.8
into (1.2) and (1.7) gives
[1.9] WTC 1 Collapse Time = sum(k=0)^93 (-u_k+(u_k^2+74.28))/9.8 =
11.38 sec
where
u_k=(16+ k)/(17+ k ) SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+74.28) ;/ u_0=0
Tower 2 began collapsing on the 77th floor. Making substitutions N=77,
j=33 , g=9.8 into (1.2) and (1.7) gives
[1.10] WTC 2 Collapse Time =sum(k=0)^77 (-u_k+(u_k^2+74.28))/9.8 =
9.48 sec
Where
u_k=(32+k)/(33+k) SQRT(u_(k-1)^2+74.28) ;/ u_0=0
REFERENCES
"Seismic Waves Generated By Aircraft Impacts and Building Collapses at
World Trade Center ", http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf
APPENDIX A: HASKELL SIMULATION PROGRAM
This function returns the gravitational field strength in SI units.
> g :: Double
> g = 9.8
This function calculates the total time for a top-down demolition.
Parameters:
_H - the total height of building
_N - the number of floors in building
_J - the floor number which initiated the top-down cascade (the 0'th
floor being the ground floor)
> cascadeTime :: Double -> Double -> Double -> Double
> cascadeTime _H _N _J = sum [ (- (u k) + sqrt( (u k)^2 + 2*g*h))/g | k<-[0..n]]
> where
> j = _N - _J
> n = _N - j
> h = _H/_N
> u 0 = 0
> u k = (j + k - 1)/(j + k) * sqrt( (u (k-1))^2 + 2*g*h )
Simulates a top-down demolition of WTC 1 in SI units.
> wtc1 :: Double
> wtc1 = cascadeTime 417 110 93
Simulates a top-down demolition of WTC 2 in SI units.
> wtc2 :: Double
> wtc2 = cascadeTime 417 110 77
By Herman Schoenfeld
Al Dykes - 02 Apr 2008 14:40 GMT
>In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
>accurately accounts for the collapse times of the World Trade Center
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>seismographic data of those events.1 Refer to equations (1.9) and
>(1.10) for details.
Where has this been published were professionals with relevant
expertise might comment on it? Posting it to this newsgroup is just
talking to people like me that can't comment on it in detail.
If Truth Movement people want me to believe their claims, they need to
speak in public with people with relevant expertise and discuss each
assertion in detail. In the science and engineering world, this would
be by participating in professional conferences. Science (and
detective work) makes progress by filtering out false claims and false
facts and then examining the resulting claims in more more detail
until more false information is identified and rejected. The "Truth
Movement" doesn't do that.
Prof. Jones, David Ray Griffin, and Richard Gage make sh.t
up. Witnesses William Rodriquez, John Schroeder, Scott Forbes, and
Kevin McPadden are the source of much of the core "Truth Movement"
claims.
To date, none of these people will speak to any but "TM friendly"
groups. They will only speak to groups that are ignorant of any the
claims being made and, hence, unable to ask meaningful questions.
There is a NYC cable TV show called HardFire. The producer tries to
find "Truth Movement" experts. He moderates polite discussions with
someone with relevant expertise. I know that he has invited the
people named, above. All of them have turned down the invitation.
The past shows are online. http://www.hardfire.net/
Until these people speak in public and defend their claims, I don't
have to believe them and can continue to point out the stupidities in
their assertions until they can satisfy me or people with relevant
expertise. That would be people with civil engineering, demolition, or
aviation or that have a detailed knowledge of the events of 9/11.
They will continue to sell books and DVDs to the ignorant.

Signature
Meet the Creators of "Loose Change" http://youtube.com/watch?v=Zs5jWvu4tR8
Meet the Scholars for 9/11 Truth http://youtube.com/watch?v=T6fe9YlHQwA
Ground Zero 911 Conspiracy Wars by Ray Rivera http://rayrivera.net
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4162315283354424113
The Ground Zeros by Mark Roberts
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5004042232637229146&hl=en
WTC Ground Zero 9/11/2007 Sad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr2LeCXXIjo
Les Jamieson and others of NY911Truth.org disparages the FDNY
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/ny911truth.orgmembersdisparagethefdnyatg
How famous Truth Movement people repond to unfortunate truths that
show them for what they are
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/semiliterateparanoiacswhofantasizeaboutt
The Naudet Film about 9/11 at WTC
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6371069744838112957&q=Naudet
Marks's collapse video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2083421624495848233&hl=en
"The 9 - 11 Conspiracies - Fact or Fiction"
http://www.torrentbox.com/torrent_details?id=125450
Anyone that hasn't seen WTC's Ground Zero in NYC and the "Truth
Movement" kooks that hang out there should look at the first three
videos. The others should be required viewing by anyone that has an
opinion about 9/11 and WTC or has never been to NYC.
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail
barnegatdx - 02 Apr 2008 16:04 GMT
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070612152114.htm
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html
Venger - 02 Apr 2008 17:04 GMT
> In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
Truthers suck. Get a life, clown.
Venger
Assy Nipples - 03 Apr 2008 00:43 GMT
> In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
> accurately accounts for the collapse times of the World Trade Center
> towers.
Nonsense. Now go away fuckwit.
Parnello's Pizza - 03 Apr 2008 08:21 GMT
On Apr 2, 7:31 am, schoenfeld....@gmail.com wrote:
> In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
> accurately accounts for the collapse times of the World Trade Center
[quoted text clipped - 142 lines]
>
> By Herman Schoenfeld
At the begining there is NO K'th Floor and you are spitting out facts
thata just Nigga ain't true Bitch!!! HAHA YOU SUCK
Parnell Parnell Parnelll
Assy Nipples - 03 Apr 2008 23:54 GMT
> At the begining there is NO K'th Floor and you are spitting out facts
> thata just Nigga ain't true Bitch!!! HAHA YOU SUCK
>
> Parnell Parnell Parnelll
Learn to trim quotes, no need to repost the whole friggin' quote.
Mr. Strat - 04 Apr 2008 13:22 GMT
In article
<14a15018-bdc8-4888-b82c-e84717347f0f@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> In this article we show that "top-down" controlled demolition
<truther bullshit snipped>
You people are really disgusting. It's time to adjust your tinfoil.
warp9pnt9 - 07 Apr 2008 19:50 GMT
> Anonymouswrote
In this article we show that "top-down" controlle
demolition accurately accounts for the collapse times of the Worl
Trade Center towers
Exactly what has this got to do with the TOPIC of FIXING AUTOMOBILES
specifically CHEVROLET automobiles? Absolutely NOTHING, that's what
It's a clear case of the need for site admin to REQIRE registratio
before posting, and to CLEAN the forums
Anyways, what's the POINT of the post? To prove that the US Militar
destroyed the building to justify a war on the Muslim world? T
prove there's some sort of conspiracy? To imply that all Muslims ar
innocent, peace-loving martyrs of American ignorance and greed for oi
for their gasoline powered vehicles? The things we're here trying t
fix, right
By the way, I'm not a Muslim hater, nor a lover. There's some grea
ideas in the belief system, no paying or charging of interest o
loans, for instance. :-D There's some not-so-great ideas as well
like the justification of demeaning and controlling women based o
the assumption that all men are animals incapable of self-control an
will otherwise act upon the most trivial of sexual urges and rape
woman or at the very least have the thought of it if he sees mor
skin that her face. The same can be said of any religious belie
system: one size does not fit all. There are fanatics to be found i
every facet of humanity
> Al Dykeswrote
Where has this been published were professionals with relevan
expertise might comment on it? Posting it to this newsgroup is jus
talking to people like me that can't comment on it in detail
An intelligent reply, at the least. Perhaps most on this forum ar
ill equipped to respond. In fact, as evidenced by the ignoran
responses quoted below, I can almost certainly guarantee it. ;-
I've never heard of this "Truth Movement" group. Th
assumption that there is one single truthful interpretation t
everything in the world is a sign of fanaticism and I quickl
disregard such comments. Does such a group write empassionned essay
about what is generally agreed upon to be true? Or do they merel
focus on what the believe to be false, and claim to know the absolut
truth and present THEORIES as EVIDENCE? Perhaps they should renam
the group, False Movement, Theoretical Alternatives, or Conspirac
Busters, after a popular TV show or a similar name. ;-
> Vengerwrote
Truthers suck. Get a life, clown
> Venge
While that may truly well be, comments like this add nothing to a
intelligent conversation
> Assy Nippleswrote
Nonsense. Now go away fuckwit
Nonsense, why? Because you can't conceive that there may be a
alternative explanation to events? Because you're a red-bloode
American with no freedom of thought, merely a singer in a chorus o
minds brainwashed with unrestrained nationalism which celebrate
their ignorance as the equivalent as patriotism
Maybe there is a conspiracy. Maybe not. I do not know. I somewha
doubt it. But I'm at least willing to listen to ideas, carefull
consider and evaluate the validity of such claims, without bein
blinded by ignorance, patriotism, nationalistic prejudice. Only b
encouraging such attitudes and embracing such people capable o
honest debate can we truly have a country to be worthy of our pride.
But ignorance is nothing to be proud of, and our embrace of people wh
celebrate their ignorance or further attack any who merely questio
that ignorance is truly deplorable. Patriotism to me isn't just
matter of saluting whatever flag was first waved in front of me afte
birth, but by questioning and ascertaining the worthiness of th
people and the ideas who live under thuis flag, and doing what I ca
to enhance the quality of thatgroup by my own actions and words
> Parnello's Pizzawrote
At the begining there is NO K'th Floor and you are spitting out fact
thata just Nigga ain't true Bitch!!! HAHA YOU SUC
> Parnell Parnell Parnell
Obviously a great intellectual who has at the least the capacity t
understand basic concepts of high school mathematics. For th
confused or uninitiated, the letters indicate the basic concept of
Algebra, to take an unknown, or arbitrary number, and say, it's not
the number that is improtant, it is the relationship between the
numbers that matters. The description of the relationship is called
an equation. A complex idea (such as the way a building collapses,
for example) may be described by a series of equations. However,
such complex patterns as observed in nature may require higher
mathematics that Algebra, typically calculus at the very least.
Therefore, going back to this claim that there is no Kth floor, I say
that all structures have a Kth floor, including those structures that
do not exist. A gazeebo has a Kth floor, K=1. Some may argue
whether the ground floor of a structure is the 0th or 1st floor. I
say, if you have 0 floors, then the structure does not exist, you
walk upon the ground only. A gazeebo may arguably be described as a
glorified tent. Or the definition of floors may be anything above
ground level, above the level that unaided man would otherwise be
able to tread, by means of a fabricated structure. :-p
> Assy Nippleswrote:
Learn to trim quotes, no need to repost the whole friggin' quote.
Amen to that!
FixExpert.com - Automotive Repair Wiki
http://www.FixExpert.com
Venger - 11 Apr 2008 14:31 GMT
>> Anonymouswrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> While that may truly well be, comments like this add nothing to an
> intelligent conversation.
You have made the mistake of assuming you can have an intelligent
conversation with a truther. You cannot, any more than you can have an
intelligent discussion about astronomy with someone who believes the
moon is made of cheese.
Venger