lol, oh i bet i do know exactly what i'm talking about... it's not water barrels on freeway divide stopping a car from impacting a guardrail.
pretensioned cables are pulled so tight before the concrete pours that when it does break there is so much stored energy inside that those cables throw massive chunks of concrete flying into other buildings and sometimes people.
when the building is failing you have all that stored energy being released... but not because the building had to overcome the resistance of the stored energy to move it.
think of it like a mousetrap... a light touch releases all that stored energy... adding energy to the system/reaction. like pulling the trigger on a gun.
it actually proves my point because each snapped cable was dumping energy into the collapse as it happened, helping it, not slowing it down.
Wow... your argument has shifted to the floors of the building are designed to assist collapse of the structure. That's 180 from the reason they do that. That method is used to get the maximum strength of the concrete allowing them to use less material and have the same structural strength.
So, what happens to the columns in your simulation?
think about what pretensioned concrete is doing... it's taking advantage of the nature of concrete where it gains strength under compression... but concrete still struggles with torsion/sheering forces
once you break the concrete and allow the steel cables to move, they have all that force stored up inside and it goes off like a bomb.
...and what columns? the core? because there were no columns thats why this building design was considered "radical" and "controversial" at the time. the core did provide resistance but not enough to "catch" the falling core from above that was slamming into it.
all the models i've seen seem to show that the floors were collapsing slightly ahead of the core and as the lower floors were being ripped out of the core it was helping to destroy it.
nobody know 100% for sure because you can't see inside the debris cloud but what exactly is the alternative explanation here? where is the thousands and thousands of charges going off in perfect unison that it takes to make a building fall like that. where are those cool det cord line flashes? nothing...
the building does exactly what i say it does, you have no evidence to the contrary.
no flashes, no puddle of solidified metal, nobody mentioning the mile long 12 inch thick trunk line of det wires running down the stairs back to the blasting box or the months of pre-demo work like ripping out walls so you can get access to critical support members and make weakening cuts with a cutting torch...
not one person mentioned that, ever...
at the end of the day wiring an entire building with explosives is a blatantly obvious process that takes months of loud destructive prep work and everyone would have known. it's such a huge risk with so many variables.
plane crashing into the building is either going to set the charges off prematurely or sever the connection wires back to the control box.
such an incredibly unlikely to succeed plan why wouldn't they just drive a bigger bomb inside it?
...and what columns? the core? because there were no columns thats why this building design was considered "radical" and "controversial" at the time. the core did provide resistance but not enough to "catch" the falling core from above that was slamming into it.
That makes no sense. And yes, the outer wall was all columns, and the core had 40 some columns, most of them were undamaged by any analysis.
The problem with your explanation is that there's NOTHING left to destroy the core, which means it should have remained standing.
I asked because I hoped you would have thought it through.
all the models i've seen seem to show that the floors were collapsing slightly ahead of the core and as the lower floors were being ripped out of the core it was helping to destroy it.
None of those models even resembled the collapses as they appeared on video, especially WTC7.
at the end of the day wiring an entire building with explosives is a blatantly obvious process that takes months of loud destructive prep work and everyone would have known. it's such a huge risk with so many variables.
You mean the 9 months earlier renovation of the entire elevator system, that would give total access to the core of the building and an explanation for any sound? That kind of renovation work?
plane crashing into the building is either going to set the charges off prematurely or sever the connection wires back to the control box.
Except the areas damaged by the planes don't need explosives, so the work there was done, also, it's required because of the lack of energy lost from gravity.
Wow... You're really grasping for anything right now. I bet you don't even understand why that hurts your argument.
lol, oh i bet i do know exactly what i'm talking about... it's not water barrels on freeway divide stopping a car from impacting a guardrail.
pretensioned cables are pulled so tight before the concrete pours that when it does break there is so much stored energy inside that those cables throw massive chunks of concrete flying into other buildings and sometimes people.
when the building is failing you have all that stored energy being released... but not because the building had to overcome the resistance of the stored energy to move it.
think of it like a mousetrap... a light touch releases all that stored energy... adding energy to the system/reaction. like pulling the trigger on a gun.
it actually proves my point because each snapped cable was dumping energy into the collapse as it happened, helping it, not slowing it down.
Wow... your argument has shifted to the floors of the building are designed to assist collapse of the structure. That's 180 from the reason they do that. That method is used to get the maximum strength of the concrete allowing them to use less material and have the same structural strength.
So, what happens to the columns in your simulation?
think about what pretensioned concrete is doing... it's taking advantage of the nature of concrete where it gains strength under compression... but concrete still struggles with torsion/sheering forces
once you break the concrete and allow the steel cables to move, they have all that force stored up inside and it goes off like a bomb.
...and what columns? the core? because there were no columns thats why this building design was considered "radical" and "controversial" at the time. the core did provide resistance but not enough to "catch" the falling core from above that was slamming into it.
all the models i've seen seem to show that the floors were collapsing slightly ahead of the core and as the lower floors were being ripped out of the core it was helping to destroy it.
nobody know 100% for sure because you can't see inside the debris cloud but what exactly is the alternative explanation here? where is the thousands and thousands of charges going off in perfect unison that it takes to make a building fall like that. where are those cool det cord line flashes? nothing...
the building does exactly what i say it does, you have no evidence to the contrary.
no flashes, no puddle of solidified metal, nobody mentioning the mile long 12 inch thick trunk line of det wires running down the stairs back to the blasting box or the months of pre-demo work like ripping out walls so you can get access to critical support members and make weakening cuts with a cutting torch...
not one person mentioned that, ever...
at the end of the day wiring an entire building with explosives is a blatantly obvious process that takes months of loud destructive prep work and everyone would have known. it's such a huge risk with so many variables.
plane crashing into the building is either going to set the charges off prematurely or sever the connection wires back to the control box.
such an incredibly unlikely to succeed plan why wouldn't they just drive a bigger bomb inside it?
lol, this is all so silly.
That makes no sense. And yes, the outer wall was all columns, and the core had 40 some columns, most of them were undamaged by any analysis.
The problem with your explanation is that there's NOTHING left to destroy the core, which means it should have remained standing.
I asked because I hoped you would have thought it through.
None of those models even resembled the collapses as they appeared on video, especially WTC7.
You mean the 9 months earlier renovation of the entire elevator system, that would give total access to the core of the building and an explanation for any sound? That kind of renovation work?
Except the areas damaged by the planes don't need explosives, so the work there was done, also, it's required because of the lack of energy lost from gravity.
The only correct thing you've said all day.