See other 9/11 Articles
Title: 9/11 Illusions, Special Effects, and Other Magic Tricks
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/1 ... ects-and-other-magic-tricks-2/
Published: Oct 13, 2012
Author: Jack White (with Jim Fetzer)
Post Date: 2012-10-13 15:44:20 by wudidiz
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 1529
Comments: 24
9/11 Illusions, Special Effects, and Other Magic Tricks
9/11 Illusions, Special Effects, and Other Magic Tricks
by Jack White (with Jim Fetzer)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
#1. To: wudidiz (#0)
This article lost all credibility when it went with the "no plane" propaganda" put out by the govt. Thierry Meyssan has admitted he was paid by the US govt to publish the no plane garbage. To make it appear legal, the govt paid for the publication and purchased $3 million worth of his bogus propaganda 9/11: The Big Lie books. This is why Rumsfeld conveniently accidentally said something about a missile hitting the Pentagon then quickly corrected himself. This disinformation has been used by the govt to help discredit any investigation into obvious discrepancies with the govt's 9/11 version and findings.
Again, as I said on the other thread, what did you expect that plane to do, bounce off the WTC South Tower as if it were made of rubber, or shatter as if it were made of glass? It was a large high velocity mass of about 250,000 pounds, hitting a mesh of relatively thin steel columns spaced far enough apart where the majority of the plane encountered no exterior resistance upon penetration. It carried a huge amount of momentum and exerted a massive amount of force upon the exterior columns of the WTC tower. That, and it all happened in a split second. So what you show in your collection of screen shots is NOT evidence that there was no plane there. Besides, it was captured on MANY different cameras, both from private individuals AND news agencies. So unless all of the news crews, camera crews, production staff, and witnesses on the scene, including the survivors, were in on this huge conspiracy to produce fraudulent video, air it in real time in relation to real world events, and plotted to kill 3000 Americans, including themselves in some cases, all to benefit PNAC and the news moguls, well, I think fairies wearing boots kicking down the towers have about as much of a chance as your story of being true.
It carried a huge amount of momentum and exerted a massive amount of force upon the exterior columns of the WTC tower. That, and it all happened in a split second. Mass X velocity = Kinetic Energy /time = Power With the plane going 500 mph, or whatever, the time element of the energy transfer to the building would have been a second or less, that's a lot of Power.
In regards to force, it's m * v = F, were m is mass in kilograms, v is velocity in meters per second, and F is force in newtons. In terms of kinetic energy, it's 1/2m * v2 = E, where E is energy in joules. From the following webpage, the amount of work done of an impact would be as follows; This fact is referred to as the Work-Energy Principle and is often a very useful tool in mechanics problem solving. It is derivable from conservation of energy and the application of the relationships for work and energy, so it is not independent of the conservation laws. It is in fact a specific application of conservation of energy. However, there are so many mechanical problems which are solved efficiently by applying this principle that it merits separate attention as a working principle. For a straight-line collision, the net work done is equal to the average force of impact times the distance traveled during the impact. With the weight of the aircraft, combined with its velocity, there would be a huge amount of kinetic energy available to do work. Power is actually amount of work done per second. Since work is determined by the initial kinetic energy - the final kinetic energy, the difference between the two objects velocity is the available power to destroy the stationary object, as well as the moving object. What comes into play is momentum, and the concept of conservation of momentum. And then there are the theories of collisions, which include elastic and inelastic collisions. It is those areas which explain scientifically how a large fast moving object will interact with a stationary object. I don't know if it's worth posting right now, but perhaps I'll put something together next week.
Save your time and brain cells. If people want/need to believe that 19 muslims did 9.11, let'em. A physics lesson won't help.
A physics lesson won't help. I guess you're right. They'll believe what they want to believe, no matter what.
That may be true, but to not try to inform them when you know the truth would be kind of like aiding and abetting the enemy by not speaking out about their crimes.
Thing is, even if I proved how much force the plane would have applied to the tower upon impact, and what the laws of momentum and collisions would show in terms of effects, they'd either not understand it, would simply ignore it, or call it disinfo. So when dealing with people such as "no planers", you have to keep it simple.
You have proved nothing... You ignore the law of action and reaction. The buildings were no cue balls that absorb and transfer momentum. They did not go anywhere. As an object busted in so to would the matter of the object blast out. ... You know nothing of crash physics.... Edit to remove junk.
What do you think collisions are? Are you really that dense?
I think we both know the answer to that last question. Either he is, or he's PRETENDING to be.
There are no replies to Comment # 24. End Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: bush_is_a_moonie, *No Planers* (#1)
#4. To: wudidiz (#2)
#6. To: FormerLurker (#4)
It was a large high velocity mass of about 250,000 pounds, hitting a mesh of relatively thin steel columns spaced far enough apart where the majority of the plane encountered no exterior resistance upon penetration.
#9. To: tom007 (#6)
(Edited)
Mass X velocity = Kinetic Energy /time = Power
Work-Energy Principle
The change in the kinetic energy of an object is equal to the net work done on the object.
Average impact force x distance traveled = change in kinetic energy
If a moving object is stopped by a collision, extending the stopping distance will reduce the average impact force. Car crash example
Seatbelt use
Auto stopping distance
Large truck-small truck collision
Two trucks, equal momentum
Impact force of falling object
#10. To: FormerLurker (#9)
#15. To: Lod (#10)
If people want/need to believe that 19 muslims did 9.11, let'em.
#16. To: FormerLurker (#15)
I guess you're right. They'll believe what they want to believe, no matter what.
#18. To: RickyJ, Lod (#16)
That may be true, but to not try to inform them when you know the truth would be kind of like aiding and abetting the enemy by not speaking out about their crimes.
#19. To: FormerLurker (#18)
(Edited)
Thing is, even if I proved how much force the plane would have applied to the tower upon impact, and what the laws of momentum and collisions would show in terms of effects, they'd either not understand it, would simply ignore it, or call it disinfo.
#23. To: titorite (#19)
... You know nothing of crash physics....
#24. To: RickyJ (#23)
Replies to Comment # 24.