Successfully removed.
Sorry, an error occurred.
|
physicsandreason uploaded a new video
(2 months ago)
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however impro...
more
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
less
|
|
| |
|
|
physicsandreason liked a video
(3 months ago)
Here is a overblown but defective description of collapse modeling by a ...
more
Here is a overblown but defective description of collapse modeling by a NASA scientist followed a similar real model showing the actual results which our brilliant scientist failed to predict. In addition there is even worse example modeling presented by MIT which was shown on national television in 2002.
Gravitational collapse with crushable supports between 2 in. diameter washers weighing approx. 1.7 oz. each. The thickness of the washers does vary, they are sorted so the thinnest at the top and thickest at the bottom. 3 of the thinnest are about equal 2 of the thickest. So the weights range from 1.4 to 2.1 ounces. The intermediate supports are loops of paper 9/16 inches tall. The top 11 supports are single loops. The next 17 are double loops and the bottom 5 are triple loops. The falling mass consists of 4 washers out of a total of 33 or 12%. So the falling mass can sustain damage just like the stationary stack.
The model supported itself for three days before the drop was taped so the loops can sustain the static load.
I have tested the single loops for what was necessary to crush a loop. Dropping 4 washers from 4 inches will crush a single loop. It takes 0.1182 joules to crush single loop
The dowel is 4 feet tall and less than 3/4 in thick and there is nearly a 1/16th gap around the dowel to a washer. Some rubbing is inevitable.
Notice that loop 11 which is a single loop remains intact. So the collapse was not stopped because of double loops.
less
|
|
| |
|
|
"Good job. The only way that the force of a falling body can exceed its..."
more
"Good job. The only way that the force of a falling body can exceed its static weight,(which IS a force =mg) is to have that falling body decelerate. Force associated with the decel is added to the body’s weight. The total force imposed is dependent on how fast it decelerates. So the KEY is deceleration without it the total force < its own weight.. The towers didn’t decelerate. They accelerated meaning they could not impose a larger force on the underlying structure than when static. "
less
|
|
| |
|
|
"@teefkay Kindly refer back to my third comment about experiments, not wo..."
more
"@teefkay Kindly refer back to my third comment about experiments, not words. Simply gather all those experts on jref, and conduct some basic experiments that address the source of the sulfur, the uniform acceleration of the towers, the partial freefall of 7, the source of the iron spheres, the fall of the spire, what cut the core columns at the 60th floor of 2, and a few others. Surely with all that brain power someone there can prove it...by experiment. Otherwise, I am unconvinced. Bye."
less
|
|
| |
|
|
"@teefkay
1. You made an incorrect assumption that I agree with your comm..."
more
"@teefkay
1. You made an incorrect assumption that I agree with your comments.
2. Physics is not a popularity contest.
3. If you think I am wrong, than prove what caused the eutectic by conducting your own experiment. Same goes true with my other experiments…roll up your sleeves and prove me wrong by experiment. (Words do little or nothing for me…..)
Lazy? Unconcerned?
Take care.
"
less
|
|
Great Channel!! 5 Stars *****
i guess THEIR 911 experiment worked!!!
watch the 'news' from the day...what a fucking JOKE!!!! fake planes, no planes on 3 live stations, NO EXPLOSION ON IMPACT!!! looney tunes plane crashes are more realistic! still,
fooled us all for a bit....
WHAT'S YOUR EXCUSE????
get REAL brother!
Angela x
I'd be extremely proud if my son grew up to be like you.
Keep up the excellent work, boss.
Great video - thank you for your hard work and dedication!