9/11 Conspiracy Theories - How the Towers Fell
(1218 posts, started )
Quote from David33 :Nor can I think of any way that the plane's mass could be converted into e=mc^2 energy; I was just playing; sorry.

quantum fluctuation... if you crash enough planes into buildings its bound to happen eventually
the randomness of the process is nicely illustrated by that fact that it didnt work on the pentagon
Quote from Stang70Fastback :Well, let me ask you this then. Do you really believe that it's possible to heat steel to the point of being ABLE to stay molten for months?!

Definitely: Cover the steel with a generous topping of mozzarella cheese. If you've ever made a lasagne you'll appreciate the world-beating insulation characteristics of mozzarella.
Quote from thisnameistaken :Definitely: Cover the steel with a generous topping of mozzarella cheese. If you've ever made a lasagne you'll appreciate the world-beating insulation characteristics of mozzarella.

I can't say I "appreciate" cheese's heat-retaining properties. While I understand the lasagna analogy, it's usually the slab of detached cheese on the pizza slice that attacks my chin. :weeping:
Quote from Shotglass :quantum fluctuation

I suppose that next you're going to claim that a duplicate set of WTC towers rose up out of the ground, at the same moments that the NYC WTC towers fell.
Quote from thisnameistaken :Definitely: Cover the steel with a generous topping of mozzarella cheese. If you've ever made a lasagne you'll appreciate the world-beating insulation characteristics of mozzarella.

You'll need to provide documentation of burned tongues, for this to be credible. Alternatively, an empty mozzarella wrapper, found on the the ground outside the WTC, may suffice.
Quote from David33 :I suppose that next you're going to claim that a duplicate set of WTC towers rose up out of the ground, at the same moments that the NYC WTC towers fell.

No. Quantum fluctuation results from massive kinetic energy changes in heavy objects. It's most likely to occur when an object traveling at a high rate of speed is significantly slowed in a very short period of time (e.g. big crash, plane into building, etc...) but can also occur if an object accelerates fast enough, although this is rare (artillery, for example will generally not undergo this effect as is is not massive enough to induce it.) When a large mass slows down very rapidly, the molecular structure of certain components can "shift" slightly. This is most common in the more dense parts (steel, for example, as opposed to plastic) because of the significant weight that must be slowed without compromising molecular stability. Imagine stacking 100 empty boxes in a 10x10 pile (boxes being molecules) and then hurling them (somehow staying together) at 20 mph into a wall. When they hit, they compress, and then bounce back so that the resulting stack is actually longer (they leave space between them as they rebound.) This is what happens during quantum fluctuation at a molecular level. However, as you know, the molecular bonds in such materials as steel are nothing if not strong, so it takes an ENORMOUS amount of energy to separate molecules, even by as much as what happens in this phenomena. So what happens is the steel actually becomes very hot as it absorbs a significant amount of heat from the surrounding environment to account for this change in its structure. Most of the time, however, the steel cools almost as quickly when the molecules snap back together, but if the impact is strong enough, the molecules are banged up so much that they cannot quite realign (imagine slamming the boxes so hard that they kind of fall out of order) and so the heat is retained, and the steel stays hot.

If enough steel undergoes this phenomena, it can actually produce a significant amount of heat.

It has nothing to do with duplication of objects, however.
Quote from David33 :I suppose that next you're going to claim that a duplicate set of WTC towers rose up out of the ground, at the same moments that the NYC WTC towers fell.

nah that would be silly

but just look at this picture taken ~3 years after the impact:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Wtc-2004-memorial.jpg
3 years and the steel is still hot enough to illuminate the night sky... think of the engery necessary
No, they were the one thing properly designed to cope with the impact of a plane. They are the old WTC garden lights.

Of course, when there was a building there the light was 'used up' illuminating them, but now they just attempt to illuminate planets.

They also keep the power stations working, thus generating jobs, which helps the economy over there
Quote from Stang70Fastback :No. Quantum fluctuation results from massive kinetic energy changes in heavy objects...

Seriously, thank you for this, which provides interesting considerations pertaining to kinetic-to-heat conversion during collision, which is something that I didn't quite understand in detail. I was not aware that what you describe, would be a representation of "quantum fluctuation" which, as little as I understand of it, I had regarded as pertaining to a concept of random creation of particle-antiparticle pairs, which led to an association of quantum coupling, in my imagination (which does, indeed, tend toward silliness, from time to time), and thus the facetious idea of "coupled" WTC towers.

I suppose that one ought to be careful about joking of serious subjects; but then, less fun and perhaps less likelihood of the occasional gem such as yours.



Edit: the proper term for what I had called "quantum coupling," is actually "quantum entanglement"
The quantum coupling you refer to is indeed proven by the twin towers. The pair of particles appear for a bit, exist, and then get annihilated (usually by each other). And when one does something the other appears to know about it.

The towers appeared, existed, and were annihilated. And when one got hit by a plane so did the other. And when one fell, so did the other.

Quantum pairing is not confined to the subatomic level it seems
Massive bump...

Just watched Zeitgeist for the first time (i know, don't shoot me). Now, i won't coment on the first part, but parts 2 and 3 are really mindblowing, much more believable info then in Loose change...
Just gotta ask, can't go through the whole thread, was it explained how the main structural collumns of the towers also colapsed, if the building alegedly fell from the "pancake effect"? And wouldn't the floors fall much slower then they did, falling on top of each other and finaly making a pile of floors, at least 50 meters high?
Have they both (zeitgeist and Loose change) made up that majority of aleged terrorist are actually alive and had nothing to do with it?
What about the Rockefellers and the Federal bank, can't remember that beeing discussed here...
Man, this is so interesting and so depressing at the same time, makes me wanna levitate and post angels an SMS..
Massive bump, that's an understatement xD
lol @ Zeitgeist
i always found stupid the black box desintegrated but the terrorist passport was found
Quote from lerts :i always found stupid the black box desintegrated but the terrorist passport was found

The terrorist passport was obviously a lie, but it does make you wonder how many less obvious lies were publicised immediately after the event.

I also liked the leap of logic that led from "Some Saudis have b0rken our WTC" to "Let's invade Afghanistan and Iraq". I suppose when most people don't know where any of those places are, it's easier to rouse public support for bombing them.
Quote from Boris Lozac : And wouldn't the floors fall much slower then they did, falling on top of each other and finaly making a pile of floors, at least 50 meters high?

Yes, maybe if the last floor starts falling it should be slow, and all floors pile-up nicely...but this is not what happened.

When towers collapsed, the top part block, falling and crunching everything below, weighted between 40 000 and 80 000 tons. With such a weight falling at once, things below do not pile up, but crunch and burn into powder.

The energy released by such a mass falling is HUGE. Several times enough to liquify dozens of tons of steel, several times enough to change into ashes everything inside the towers. And the falling mass gets bigger as floors below are smashed and start falling too.

So big that only a tiny fraction of this energy released is enough to smash completely all floors above... and so the fall is only a fraction slower than a free fall.
Quote from Boris Lozac :Just watched Zeitgeist for the first time (i know, don't shoot me). Now, i won't coment on the first part, but parts 2 and 3 are really mindblowing, much more believable info then in Loose change...

If you took the time to watch Zeitgeist, why not take some time to read Conspiracy Science, a website that tries to debunk the movie. Or just see where Google takes you if you search for "zeitgeist" and "debunk".

BTW, kudos for your stamina, watching the whole movie. I could barely stand it for 5 minutes. Then my propaganda detector sounded, my baloney detector went berserk, so I had to stop.
Quote from wsinda :
BTW, kudos for your stamina, watching the whole movie. I could barely stand it for 5 minutes. Then my baloney detector went berserk and I had to stop.

Well, what can i say, i don't know much about religion or anything, i'm not baptised (is that the right word) so all that info from the first part doesn't mean much to me, but it's an interesting to see the comparison beatween astrology and Christianity, every relegion had it's own version of god with the exact same detalis how he was born then resurected, etc, and it's all connected to the sun and astrology, makes you wonder what kind of powerfull mass-controlled orgranizations religions have beecome, from such an obvious myths and false interpretations.. but i will look into those links and try not to sound foolish if i don't know exactly what i'm talking about..

I don't know why do majority see Zeitgeist as fail, it raises plenty of interesting questions and teories, at least it gets you thinking...

WHY the hell were there terrorist atacks simulations/training going on conveniantly just for 9/11?! and again conveniantly in the London bombings? (now, i don't know if that info is debunked or not, but why would they make it up, and there are even recordings from the pilots wondering if that's practice or real life)
They say they could never imagine the terrorists flying Airplanes into US buildings, they thought they would never came up with such a thing, YET! they were doing the exact same simulations earlier that year? As i recall reading this thread no one gave clear answers to these questions, yet you say Zeitgeist fails, and again can't recall the proper answer to WTC 7 colapse, HOW THE FU*K that building came down from a small fire, seriously?! In a perfect controlable manner...
Do you think its Bush who runs the show? Bush is just a puppet.

___

Theirs more than meets the eye in this matter, but people shouldn't base there opinions on propaganda like Zeitgeist.
oh man wwii goes on, do you know how many nazis are around, they burn that Reichstag themselves to blame the jewish and now repeated the trick

how many times unfortunatly did i hear in a bar: "id exterminate all blacks"

yep there are many mean people

Not respecting each other
Deny thy brother
The wars' going on but the reasons' undercover
The truth is kept secret
Swept under the rug
If you never know truth
Then you never know love

i think the legimitate american goverment is on the good side on this war

another thing is so many nazis with power in the cia
Quote from Juls :Yes, maybe if the last floor starts falling it should be slow, and all floors pile-up nicely...but this is not what happened.

When towers collapsed, the top part block, falling and crunching everything below, weighted between 40 000 and 80 000 tons. With such a weight falling at once, things below do not pile up, but crunch and burn into powder.

The energy released by such a mass falling is HUGE. Several times enough to liquify dozens of tons of steel, several times enough to change into ashes everything inside the towers. And the falling mass gets bigger as floors below are smashed and start falling too.

So big that only a tiny fraction of this energy released is enough to smash completely all floors above... and so the fall is only a fraction slower than a free fall.

Where did you hear all that?

First, What made all the structure below the impact loose it's rigidity? It would be impossible, I'll say that again, it would be impossible for the top section of either tower to "crush" the remaining section of either tower, no matter how heavy it was. It held all that weight for years, so why, when a plane hits the tower, the floors/columns below loose their strength? Impossible...

Second, here's another impossibility, the steel was liquified from the top section falling onto the floors below? Wth man, that just can't happen, I don't know where you heard that.

You talk about tiny fraction of energy as if the rest of the building was made of paper, the building was built to hold up the top part of the tower, why when the top falls the rest just goes pfff and lets the top crush it to the ground. Steel box columns cannot collapse into themselves, straight down, so how you can mechanically picture this collapse in your mind confuses me.

So, what happened to the section that did all the crushing? It just fell into pieces when it hit the ground? I'm curious because if this falling/crushing section of the building had the energy to crush the ENTIRE building, surely it would still be intact sitting on top of all the rubble? No?

Lets look at the conservation of momentum for a moment.
Quote :The law of conservation of linear momentum is a fundamental law of nature, and it states that the total momentum of a closed system of objects (which has no interactions with external agents) is constant. One of the consequences of this is that the center of mass of any system of objects will always continue with the same velocity unless acted on by a force from outside the system.

Now look at the first tower to collapse. Then ask yourself, was this collapse controlled? Your answer can only be yes because this is a law of nature. Once something starts moving it will continue on its path unless something from outside it acts upon it. The top of the tower begins to fall the way mechanically minded people think it should, falling over and off the main tower, but then suddenly it just goes straight down, impossible without outside interference. I don't care how heavy this section was, the tower was well able to withstand this section and it should have fallen off the tower, not crushed it totally to the ground, then itself crumbles when it hits the ground. It would be funny only for the 1000's of people who were murdered.

Quote from lerts :i think you show big gullibility and paranoia thinking bush was involved

bush was not involved, he gives me good vibrations, he is a luciferian, a firm believer in freedom

You can't be serious? You sound like a mason covering his bretherens ass. Any true luciferian is far from a believer in freedom...

I understand that Bush isn't the one in control but you can't honestly tell me that Bush, being a luciferian, truely believes in freedom for the Americans? As Rdcranno said, Bush is a puppet being told what to say. There are much more powerfull men than him. The Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations are where the big boys are. Most of them nobody here will have heard of. Quick example, Tony Blair and Bertie Ahearn(former Irish Taoiseach) both were invited to the annual Bilderberg meeting one year before they were (s)elected.

9/11 was the starting point of all our troubles today, the "War on Terror" will never end, and I mean never because how can they ever catch "Terror"? It's another impossibility.
Quote from U4IK ST8 :First, What made all the structure below the impact loose it's rigidity? It would be impossible, I'll say that again, it would be impossible for the top section of either tower to "crush" the remaining section of either tower, no matter how heavy it was. It held all that weight for years, so why, when a plane hits the tower, the floors/columns below loose their strength? Impossible...

Not at all impossible. It's called inertia and momentum. A dynamic failing.
Quote from U4IK ST8 :Second, here's another impossibility, the steel was liquified from the top section falling onto the floors below? Wth man, that just can't happen, I don't know where you heard that.

Can't it? Ever felt how hot a screw can get just turning it through soft wood? Imagine tonnes of it falling on top of itself.
Quote from U4IK ST8 :You talk about tiny fraction of energy as if the rest of the building was made of paper, the building was built to hold up the top part of the tower, why when the top falls the rest just goes pfff and lets the top crush it to the ground. Steel box columns cannot collapse into themselves, straight down, so how you can mechanically picture this collapse in your mind confuses me.

Steel box columns can collapse in on themselves. It's called buckling. Try it with a coke can - stand on it, touch the side and watch it buckle with the same weight it used to take. Take another coke can. Stand on it. Then jump (and land on it). It will crush, even though you weigh the same...
Quote from U4IK ST8 :So, what happened to the section that did all the crushing? It just fell into pieces when it hit the ground? I'm curious because if this falling/crushing section of the building had the energy to crush the ENTIRE building, surely it would still be intact sitting on top of all the rubble? No?

No, it would have broken up as it fell and the massive forces were distributed over the material. It would still weigh the same, but just not be a solid, single piece.
Quote from U4IK ST8 :Lets look at the conservation of momentum for a moment.
Now look at the first tower to collapse. Then ask yourself, was this collapse controlled? Your answer can only be yes because this is a law of nature. Once something starts moving it will continue on its path unless something from outside it acts upon it. The top of the tower begins to fall the way mechanically minded people think it should, falling over and off the main tower, but then suddenly it just goes straight down, impossible without outside interference. I don't care how heavy this section was, the tower was well able to withstand this section and it should have fallen off the tower, not crushed it totally to the ground, then itself crumbles when it hits the ground. It would be funny only for the 1000's of people who were murdered.

The 'outside interference' was the internal structure. The law of conservation of momentum was maintained, but as the towers are not an constant density throughout the structure it would quite easily divert the direction of collapse.
Quote from lerts :

Not respecting each other
Deny thy brother
The wars' going on but the reasons' undercover
The truth is kept secret
Swept under the rug
If you never know truth
Then you never know love


Black Eyed Peas - Where Is The Love?

9/11 Conspiracy Theories - How the Towers Fell
(1218 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG