Why indeed did the wtc buildings collapse

View 1 excerpt, cites background. Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials. View 2 excerpts, cites background. In this Letter, we wish to set a foundation for productive discussion and … Expand. View 5 excerpts, cites background.

Examination of four of these samples, collected … Expand. View 3 excerpts, cites background. It is then argued that the hypercritical atmosphere of the internet … Expand. Rebuilding the Road to Freedom of Reason. Anyone who has common-sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is … Expand. Analysis is given of the Omega Point cosmology, an extensively peer-reviewed proof i.

Auto i: Steven E. The Events of September 11, Apex Crime. Why did the world trade center collapse? Science, engineering, and speculation. There have been numerous reports detailing the cause of the World Trade Center Tower collapse on September 11, The vertical capacity of the connections supporting an intact floor below the level of collapse was adequate to carry the load of 11 additional floors if the load was applied gradually and 6 additional floors if the load was applied suddenly as was the case.

Since the number of floors above the approximate floor of collapse initiation exceeded six in each WTC tower 12 floors in WTC 1 and 29 floors in WTC 2 , the floors below the level of collapse initiation were unable to resist the suddenly applied gravitational load from the upper floors of the buildings. Consider a typical floor immediately below the level of collapse initiation and conservatively assume that the floor is still supported on all columns i.

Consider further the truss seat connections between the primary floor trusses and the exterior wall columns or core columns. The individual connection capacities ranged from 94, pounds to , pounds, with a total vertical load capacity for the connections on a typical floor of 29,, pounds see Section 5. The total floor area outside the core was approximately 31, square feet, and the average load on a floor under service conditions on Sept.

Thus, the total vertical load on a floor outside the core can be estimated by multiplying the floor area 31, square feet by the gravitational load 80 pounds per square foot , which yields 2,, pounds this is a conservative load estimate since it ignores the weight contribution of the heavier mechanical floors at the top of each WTC tower. By dividing the total vertical connection capacity 29,, pounds of a floor by the total vertical load applied to the connections 2,, pounds , the number of floors that can be supported by an intact floor is calculated to be a total of 12 floors or 11 additional floors.

This simplified and conservative analysis indicates that the floor connections could have carried only a maximum of about 11 additional floors if the load from these floors were applied statically. Even this number is conservatively high, since the load from above the collapsing floor is being applied suddenly. Since the dynamic amplification factor for a suddenly applied load is 2, an intact floor below the level of collapse initiation could not have supported more than six floors.

Since the number of floors above the level where the collapse initiated exceeded six for both towers 12 for WTC 1 and 29 for WTC 2 , neither tower could have arrested the progression of collapse once collapse initiated. In reality, the highest intact floor was about three WTC 2 to six WTC 1 floors below the level of collapse initiation.

Thus, more than the 12 to 29 floors reported above actually loaded the intact floor suddenly. Were the basic principles of conservation of momentum and energy satisfied in NIST's analyses of the structural response of the towers to the aircraft impact and the fires? The basic principles of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy were satisfied in these analyses.

In the case of the aircraft impact analyses, which involved a moving aircraft velocity and an initially stationary building, the analysis did, indeed, account for conservation of momentum and energy kinetic energy, strain energy.

After each tower had finished oscillating from the aircraft impact, the subsequent degradation of the structure involved only minute essentially zero velocities. Thus, a static analysis of the structural response and collapse initiation was appropriate.

Since the velocities were zero and since momentum is equal to mass times velocity, the momentum terms also equaled zero and therefore dropped out of the governing equations.

The analyses accounted for conservation of energy. Using all the visual and physical evidence available, NIST conducted simulations of the fires in each of the towers from the time of airplane impact to the collapses. In a following set of computations, the evolving temperatures of the concrete and steel structural components of the towers were calculated by exposing them to the mapped air temperatures shown in NIST NCSTAR G.

Both sets of computations are based on the fundamental laws of combustion, heat transfer, and air flow. The methods have been documented extensively and have been successfully subjected to technical peer review and published in professional journals.

Since the melting point of steel is about 1, degrees Celsius 2, degrees Fahrenheit and the temperature of a jet fuel fire does not exceed 1, degrees Celsius 1, degrees Fahrenheit , how could fires have impacted the steel enough to bring down the WTC towers? The melting point of steel is about 1, degrees Celsius 2, degrees Fahrenheit. Normal building fires and hydrocarbon e. However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1, degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value.

Steel that is unprotected e. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers. If this was the case, wouldn't the fires have burned out in about 2 minutes?

Why do NIST's models show the fires burning longer? Nearly all fires are limited either by the burning rate of combustible fuel fuel-limited fires or by the availability of air ventilation-limited fires. Many fires that are ventilation limited do continue to burn, with the burning rate determined by the chemistry of the combustion and the rate at which the oxygen arrives.

This was generally the case for the WTC Tower fires. Of course, if the rate of air inflow were too slow e. This was not the case on the fire floors in the WTC towers. We know that the sprinkler systems were activated because survivors reported water in the stairwells. If the sprinklers were working, how could there be a "raging inferno" in the WTC towers?

Both the NIST calculations and interviews with survivors and firefighters indicated that the aircraft impacts severed the water pipes that carried the water to the sprinkler systems. The sprinklers were not operating on the principal fire floors. However, there were ample sources of the water in the stairwells. The water pipes ran vertically within the stairwells. Moreover, there would have been copious water from the broken restroom supply lines and from the water tanks that supplied the initial water for the sprinklers.

Thus, it is not surprising that evacuating occupants encountered a lot of water. Even if the automatic sprinklers had been operational, the sprinkler systems—which were installed in accordance with the prevailing fire safety code—were designed to suppress a fire that covered as much as 1, square feet on a given floor.

This amount of coverage is capable of controlling almost all fires that are likely to occur in an office building. This created infernos that could not have been suppressed even by an undamaged sprinkler system, much less one that had been appreciably degraded. If thick black smoke is characteristic of an oxygen-starved, lower temperature, less intense fire, why was thick black smoke exiting the WTC towers when the fires inside were supposed to be extremely hot?

Nearly all indoor large fires, including those of the principal combustibles in the WTC towers, produce large quantities of optically thick, dark smoke. This is because, at the locations where the actual burning is taking place, the oxygen is severely depleted and the combustibles are not completely oxidized to colorless carbon dioxide and water. The visible part of fire smoke consists of small soot particles whose formation is favored by the incomplete combustion associated with oxygen-depleted burning.

Once formed, the soot from the tower fires was rapidly pushed away from the fires into less hot regions of the building or directly to broken windows and breaks in the building exterior. At these lower temperatures, the soot could no longer burn away. Thus, people saw the thick dark smoke characteristic of burning under oxygen-depleted conditions. Why were people seen in the gaps left by the plane impacts if the heat from the fires behind them was so excessive?

NIST believes that the persons seen were away from any strong heat source and most likely in an area that at the time was a point where the air for combustion was being drawn into the building to support the fires. Note that people were observed only in the openings in WTC 1. Thus, it is not surprising that none of the photographs show a person standing in those gaps where there also was a sizable fire.

In general, there was little sustained fire near the area where the aircraft hit the towers. Immediately upon impact of the aircraft, large fireballs from the atomized jet fuel consumed all the local oxygen. This in itself would have made those locations rapidly unlivable.

The fireballs receded quickly and were followed by fires that grew inside the tower where there was a combination of combustible material, air, and an ignition source. Little combustible material remained near the aircraft entry gashes, since the aircraft "bulldozed" much of it toward the interior of the building.

Also, some of the contents fell through the breaks in the floor to the stories below. Therefore, the people observed in these openings must have survived the aircraft impact and moved—once the fireballs had dissipated—to the openings where the temperatures were cooler and the air was clearer than in the building interior.

For studying the impact on a story building by an actual Boeing aircraft, a full-scale test was not feasible.

For a test to capture the response of the towers as a system, it would have been necessary to construct a test assembly that included the core columns, exterior columns, floors and hat truss. Many thanks to DCN for publishing this article.

I only wish American MSM has such integrity. After this study, that other evidence must be viewed in a new light. The entire interior of the steel structure was covered with asbestos. The steel was E81 and the structure support was from a mesh from the combination of structural steel from the elevator shafts, floor trusses to the steel enforced concrete on the outer structure which all went up in a pyroclastic flow of pulverized concrete, everything inside the structure and nothing was found bigger that a soccer ball that would be found in a collapse and the power was such that ejecting several hundred thousand tons of large portions of the structure was over several hundred feet.

Watching this situation unfold is one more example of how corrupt our government is. Here is a group of Architects and Engineers with scientific fact providing the buildings could not have fallen the way NIST hypothesis said it did, and it was a theory. If then. But let me run a red light and see what happens to me.

I totally agree that this should be based on evidence, not some hair-brained theory. Hearty congratulations are due the Daily Commercial News for this fine article describing problems with the official explanation of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. I have long been aware of these concerns with the NIST report and applaud your publication here for the accuracy, pertinence, and concision of the article. I hope this will indeed aid in disseminating the truth about Building 7 and the other buildings of the World Trade Center complex on that fateful day in September Baby steps.

And worse, once you tell them they ask if I really thought we went to the moon. They are oh so well indoctrinated. Heads will not roll … but they should. Smaller groups will still have corruption … but never on this scale. And there is always that remote chance that one of the splintered groups will be corruption free.

The legal document, including all the exhibits of evidence, can be read on their website. So sad that it could take nearly 20 years for some of the more courageous media to ask questions about this. I do not believe in conspiracies. It must have been 18 guys from a mix of countries like Saudi Arabia, among others that just got lucky. Hmm…there is something just a little suspicious besides 3 buildings collapsing in perfect demolition form going on here.

Maybe we should actually investigate crimes? All sarcasm intended. Just shows the Level and depth of corruption that had to be involved to get NIST to ever suggest it was anything other than a controlled demolition…. All you have to do is open your eyes…. As Canadians we have a lot to learn from this scientific process. Our buildings are structured on the same standards.

I heard the owner of bldg. Also, my daughter lives in the U. My 9th grade physics class was enough to tell me that. This study follows suit, and hopefully, it will become the cornerstone to eventually discovering the full truth of that day, and those who precipitated it. I commend Dr. Hulsey and his team for their excellent report. This revelation is but the tip of the iceberg.

There is much more to this story! Since the dawn of skyscrapers, there has been no highrise steelbuildings ever, to collapse from fire. Yet on 11 september , three such structures miraculously happened to do just that. I detest the stench of foul play, just as much as a despise the cowards hiding murderers. Daily Commercial News is to be commended for publishing a balanced and factual article about an issue that most media outlets are still too cowed to touch.

One point deserves clarification for those unfamiliar with the layout of the World Trade Center. Building 7 was a full metres away from the nearest of the Twin Towers the North Tower , and was separated from it by another major building WTC 6. Exactly how much has never been made clear, but NIST itself dismissed the possibility that the damage contributed to the structural weakening of the building.

For not giving up, thanks to you more than half the country does not believe the story told. Sooner or later they will have to come to terms with who really did this, and I am hoping for a great awakening. Controlled demolition would leave obvious visible evidence on the steel structural elements of the building after the building collapsed. That evidence would be clear to anyone and everyone at the site after the dust settled. It would be unmistakable. Engineers whose objective is to argue against and not look for structural explanations for building collapses are not going to find them.

Thank you Leroy Hulsey and team for providing irrefutable scientific evidence of what did and did not happen to Building 7. The door is wide open for NIST to make the corrections. It showed that it was impossible. But the truth of the free-fall collapse is very simple.

Just looking at the video clips of the story building dropping symmetrically, with little deformation reveals to most open-people that it was a controlled demolition.

Just watch it, and judge for yourself. In this vein, I would like to point to a very important expert interview that is incredibly damning of the official story. The interview was conducted by Dutch television reporters, who asked Danny Jowenko, a leading building demolition expert in Europe, what he saw when they showed him a clip of WTC 7 falling. They did not tell him what building it was beforehand, nor did he appear to recognize it.

His immediate and unequivocal reaction was that it was a controlled demolition. The interview is in three parts on YouTube, in Dutch with English subtitles. Here is a link to the first part:. Excellent article, thank you. And well done to all the architects and engineers who tirelessly helped realise this important scientific body of work.

The findings from UAF are unimpeachable. A full copy of the report is available for free at the University website, where all professionals should see for themselves.

Hulsey et al, and all those at AE truth, are to be commended for their perseverance and bravery. WTC 7 was clearly visible behind her in the background. This has now been confirmed by University of Alaska Fairbanks.

My compliments for this honest and factual reporting. Thank you. Please stand up to the upcoming requests to censor yourself speaking about reality in stead of some narrative pushed by those Powers that Should Not Be. Have a nice day. The collapse was only a controlled demolition. No one under the logical science could believe the NIST theory.

Surprise surprise….. Wouldnt be surprised if the WH tries to stop all that. All those people who lost their lives and some families are still in trauma, deserve to know how American Govt murdered its own people in cold blood. Be still, my heart! It is encouraging that a large newspaper has covered this story as it certainly lacks coverage practically every where else. Clearly they know this is not true. I have followed AETruth.

I feel they are on the correct track. Personally, I think it is important that we keep this a scientific discussion rather than get distracted on who, why and for what. NIST needs to be able to prove that the UAF study which is publicly available is not accurate or at least be able to make their modelling information public so that others can scrutinize their findings. The evidence is clear and now we must get out the crayons and show the fact that you have exposed The real criminals.

Time now for justice before they all die of old age. Thank you for this long overdue story it demonstrates a truly honest approach to this remarkable coverup of facts by NIST. Well done. Steel framed buildings cannot collapse in free fall unless the strength has been completely removed below the falling section. Even Shyam Sunder lead investigator for NIST explained why that is impossible from fire in a press conference in August to launch the draft edition of their report into the collapse.

Looks like a demolition to me! This report just confirms what my eyes were telling me when the buildings came down. It was a controlled demolition and a false flag operation so the administration could pass the patriot act without any pushback from anyone and it worked perfectly.

Even Senator Bob Graham of Florida has many questions concerning this physical impossibility but he has ben kept from stating his knowledge due to the possibility of prosecution. I also wanted to add that in this world the physics would make this kind of free fall collapse impossible. In this day and age — during the information revolution — we should not have to wait twenty years for there to be mainstream discussion of the event from a scientific perspective.

NIST, by abandoning science, has done the world a terrible disservice. Those responsible deserve to be held in opprobrium. John Hort is on target. Neo-Cons Zakheim, Wolfowitz, et al participated in the study. Zakheim was Comptroller of the Pentagon budget. A missile hit the Pentagon destroying the section where the ONI was investigating the fraud. Owner Silverstein wanted to redevelop the WTC but faced billion dollar bills for asbestos fire-proofing removal. But the failure visibly began in the centre.

Each fraud was covered up by another. A few thousand spectators, some may have videotaped it, a nice reward may tease out a few of these so we can compare the tapes. Delivered coffee to Windows on the World restaurant , the elevator banks were two and three feet deep steel reenforced concrete , they would have been standing if a fire took down the buildings.