What Newton has to say about the collapse of WTC
Tradução para o inglês do meu artigo O que Newton tem a dizer sobre o colapso do WTC publicado em 2011 neste blog e na página do GlobalResearch.
has to say about
the collapse of WTC Newton
By Francisco Roland Di Biase
This article does not intend to go into details of the reasons that led to the "attacks" of the WTC (
), nor who was
responsible. My intention is simply to show the evidence together with some
basics physics concepts that the three buildings, that’s right, the World Trade
and Building 7 (WTC 7) were destroyed by the method of controlled demolition,
planned before the events of September 11, 2001. This conclusion becomes clear because
another explanation would violate the Laws of Physics like the official
explanation does. Twin Towers
First we need to establish the chronology of events that led to the collapses. The
Tower (WTC 1), with the big antenna on
top, was the first to be hit, at 08:45 eastern time ( ). It burned for 103 minutes over 5
floors and collapsed at 10:28. The New York (WTC 2) was hit, at
09:03 and burned for 56 minutes on 8 floors, it collapsed at 09:59. Both
buildings had 110 floors with a height of South
Tower 415 meters. WTC 7 was
not hit by any airplane and collapsed at 17:20 of the same day in just 7
The official explanation provided by the department in charge to investigate the cause of the WTC collapse, NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), is called Inward Bowing Theory. It says that the columns of an arched wall bowed because of the fires’ heat and were unable to withstand the gravitational loads (the weight). These loads were transferred to the adjacent columns by the trusses, which quickly became overloaded and in a rapid sequence, this instability spread to all other walls. Then the section of the building above the impact point (near the 98th floor), acting as a rigid block leaned at least 8 degrees south. The downward motion of this block was more than the damaged structure could withstand, and the global collapse began. From that point on, NIST apparently based on the “pile-driver” hypothesis suggested in a series of articles by Zdenek Bazant with several co-authors. He describes a scenario where the top of the building (part above the point of impact) remains solid as it destroys the bottom. Only when the bottom was completely destroyed in a compact pile of rubble, the top is them destroyed.
You may find this explanation odd because the most widespread theory of how the towers collapsed is the "pancake theory" created by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). It postulates a progressive failure of the floor system of the WTC towers ie somehow the floors got loose and were colliding with each other. It had to be discarded by NIST because in the numerous tests it was concluded that even at much higher temperatures than those suggested in the WTC fire the floor system, consisting of a frame of steel trusses, built with concrete, connecting the core columns with the external, not collapsed.
As for the WTC 7, the collapse is attributed to a failure of a single column that was supported by beams in a complex scenario involving thermal expansion of these beams, due to isolates office fires. Then they say that the interior of the building collapsed within its own footprint and was followed by the external walls that had become a hollow shell. Thus, according to NIST, the videos that exist only show the collapse of the external walls.
Well those are the official explanations provided by NIST that was tasked by the Bush administration to investigate the causes of the collapse, in another words, if we think the
is telling the truth we must believe in these explanations. US
Now let's point out some observations that can be made in numerous videos of the collapses that make the official explanation, at least, forced and the mainstream media chose not to show (censored?), or show, but did not emphasize the most important points.
The three WTC buildings were the only high rise buildings to collapse due to fire damage before and after September 11, this never happened before or again. A few examples are the
building with 38 storeys, in ,
caught fire on February 23, 1991 that lasted 18 hours, spread over 8 floors but
not collapsed. Philadelphia
On October 17,
2004, a building in with 56 floors,
built in 1976, caught fire which lasted 17 hours and spread over 26 floors and
not collapsed. Caracas
In February 2005 there was a huge fire at the
a skyscraper in
that lasted about 20 hours and the building, once again, not collapsed. We see
in the picture clearly that the building was engulfed in flames, but at the end
the structure remained standing. Madrid
in flames and after the fire indsor Tower
A significant information about the fire that most people do not know is that when he has this whitish yellow color like in the picture is because it's burning up too much oxygen. In the case of the WTC the fire was dark red with very dark smoke indicating that there was hardly any more oxygen to burn, and without oxygen the fire is extinguished and does not burn.
In the wreckage of the WTC were found pools of molten metal and even though it rained between 14 and 21 September, having been used fire retardant and water, firefighters managed to extinguish the fire only on December 13. Do not forget that steel (the metal used in the structure of the WTC) melts only at
and burning office furniture can come in the most favorable conditions, even with
jet fuel to 760º C. For NIST's theory to work, the steel would have to reach at
least 980º C. Below is a picture taken in infrared by NASA which was recorded
surface temperatures a few days after September 11. The molten metal found by
workers at ground zero were with temperatures twice as high, for being in the
basement and the elevator shafts, well below the surface.
During the collapse of the
metal rods weighing many tons were ejected sideways more than Twin Towers 150 meters at speeds
exceeding 100 km/h
(or 60 mph).
A video that can be viewed on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=eHnLlwqiu0A) shows an analysis by David Chandler, where he explained how
it calculated the horizontal velocity of these objects.
Metal been ejected sideways
A section of the building weighing more than 300 tons was embedded in the American Express building about
120 meters (circa of 120 yards) away.
Piece of the WTC embedded in the Amex building
Some "experts" were on television saying that these pieces of the WTC were ejected laterally due to air that was being moving in the core of the building that was essentially hollow and was being compressed as the top came crushing the bottom. But keep in mind that the air being compressed does not have a prefer direction to follow, the standard would be to take the entire floor and then blow all the windows while leaving the building. And as we can see in the picture below there were poofs of air far below the line of destruction.
Poofs of air in the WTC
No other building around the towers, other the WTC 7 which was more distant, as can be seen in the schematic of the WTC complex, collapsed due to fire and damage caused by debris from the towers.
WTC complex schematic
3, a 22-story building directly below the
towers was split in half by the debris but did not collapse.
4, a 9-storey building was almost completely
destroyed but the structure remained standing.
WTC 5 had 9-story, suffered from a severe fire and damage caused by debris but did not collapse.
WTC 6, 8 floors, suffered massive damages due to wrecks and fires but did not fall.
We must also remember that several people, including Brian Clark, manager of the firm Eurobrokers, managed to leave the top of the towers. They were above the impact point, and managed to get to the lobby saving themselves. If the fire was hot enough to weaken steel, at least 900° C, how these people manage to do this?
Contrary to what happened with the twin towers, causing considerable damage to adjacent structures, WTC 7 collapsed symmetrical directly into it’s on footprint with a total disintegration of the steel structure and limited damage to adjacent structures as seen in the photos below.
WTC 7 after the collapse
Firefighters and several witnesses reported a series of explosions before and during the collapse of the towers as seen in the video "Fireman Explosion Testimony" on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO1ps1mzU8o). And in this other video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I) called "Explosions on 911 " several firefighters have been together in a pay phone calling home telling their families that they are ok. Suddenly they are startled by a loud sound of an explosion. This is one of the explosions in WTC 7 that occurred long before its collapse.
As the buildings were collapsing they created a pyroclastic cloud of pulverize concrete that is much more common to be seen in volcanic eruptions than in collapsing buildings.
Evidence of the incendiary Thermite was found in steel samples collected. This material which is a combination of aluminum with iron oxide reaches temperatures of 2400° C in 2 seconds and is commonly used in controlled demolitions for cutting structural steel columns. In this video "9/11 Experiments: The Great Debate Thermate" by Jonathan Cole (http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g) we see an experiment where the thermite is used to cut a steel beam. Once that the two materials begin to react, the energy released is so great that melts steel.
Metal pieces of WTC. They are evidence of molten steel and severe erosion by high temperature documented by FEMA in Appendix C of its report. Subsequent analysis also revealed the signature of thermite.
In addition to thermite, a material that should not be in the WTC, a group of scientists led by physicist Steven Jones found in dust samples (those clouds of pulverized concrete) what they called nano-thermite. Their findings were published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, Volume 2, with the title "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" and were confirmed by chemical engineer Mark Basile who found the same material. Unlike thermite, an incendiary material, nano-thermite is explosive.
The first thing they found were microspheres rich in iron (photo below) that are a signature of a thermitic reaction. In addition to them the USGS (United States Geological Survey), a government agency, and the environmental firm RJ Lee also found these spheres.
Then Steve Jones with the help of physicist Jeff Ferrer, an expert in the use of scanning and transmission electron microscopes, found the red/gray chips that are unreacted nano-thermite.
The nano-thermite is basically composed of aluminum and iron oxide, such as thermite, in an array of silicon with carbon, an organic component used to generate gas making the material explosive. What made these scientists to characterize this kind of thermite as nano-thermite was precisely their scale. This material begins to react only when the temperature reaches 430º C, so it’s necessary to use some incendiary to generate that temperature. Then, once is ignite, the oxygen passes from the iron oxide to the aluminum releasing large amounts of energy and generating molten iron.
To create the micro-spheres the only plausible explanation so far is that when the nano-thermite explodes, it generates molten iron that is ejected into the air very quickly, and similarly when it rains the water falls as droplets, the molten iron form droplets that quickly cooled before reaching the ground, forming the micro-spheres.
If we going to analyze the collapse of the WTC towers we must at least have an idea of how the towers were built and some of the characteristics are really interesting.
The core of each tower was a rectangle of 26.5 by
divided into 47 steel columns that ranged from 91.5 by 40.5 centimeters to
56 by 132 centimeters
and were much thicker at the base. In this core was where the elevators (each
tower had 99), ladders, pipes and pipe maintenance were, in other words,
despite this massive steel structure in the center to support the building, the
core was basically empty.
WTC tower being built
WTC tower schematic
As for the external perimeter walls they were composed of a dense frame of vertical steel columns with a layer of steel spandrel enclosing each floor.
Assembling of the external layer
This external layer was constructed with pieces of steel prefabricated consisting of three vertical columns with three horizontal steel spandrels welded together. Adjacent parts were bolted, column with column in the top and bottom, spandrels with their neighbors on which side with numerous screws.
There were 59 columns on the external layer of each face and one column in the beveled corner, a total of 240 external columns in each tower. And as the columns in the core at the base they were much thicker than in the top.
The towers were supported by this external layer, which stiffen its structure, along with the core columns making it very efficient to withstand lateral wind loads. And according to Frank Demartini, construction project manager of the WTC, they were designed to withstand the impact of one or more commercial airplanes, ie, this structure should withstand the impact of an aircraft Boeing 707, the largest commercial airplane at the time. And despite the 707 being smallest than the 767 the kinetic energy of the two is equivalent once the 707 travels at higher speeds.
Schematic of WTC structure
WTC 7 was a skyscraper of 47 floors which was not hit by an airplane and had minor damage caused by the collapse of the
You could see scattered fires in the building (pictured below) but to no
concern and according with NIST these fires made the columns buckle and the
building collapse. Twin Towers
Scattered fires in WTC 7
The interesting thing is that the building did not fall as expected where the fire is gradually causing minor damage and the collapse occurs asymmetrically by the path of least resistance. Just watch the fire consume the wood in a fireplace, it is gradually consuming the wood and causing localized and asymmetric collapses.
Now to the point that would make
roll in his grave.
The collapse has an free fall acceleration i.e. the acceleration of gravity,
and we can’t forget, occur through the path of greatest resistance. And that is
really important because you can only happening when the support columns are
removed simultaneously through the entire structure. Let me explain, we need a
little basic physics (Newton's laws), nothing we have not learned in high
school, to prove that other forces were involved in the destruction, by the
simple fact that it is impossible to a building achieve a free fall
acceleration with only the force of gravity acting. Newton
The acceleration of gravity is nothing more than the rate at which the an object speed increases in free fall, neglecting air resistance. It causes an object to increase its speed to about 9.78m/s every second (usually abbreviated to 9.78 m/s2). It has small variations at each site on the planet, but in
is 9.808 m/s2. New York
Isaac Newton showed that the acceleration of an object is governed by the mass of the object and the resultant force acting on it (
Law: F = m x a). If the acceleration of
a falling object is equal to the acceleration of gravity, then the resultant
force is only the force of gravity. Newton
's Third Law tells us that when objects
interact they exert equal and opposite forces between them. So as an object is
falling if it exerts a force on objects in its path, the same objects will
exert the same force, just in the opposite direction, i.e. upwards, which will
decrease the acceleration of fall. If an object is observed in free fall we can
safely conclude that nothing in its path exerts a breaking force and by Newton 's Third Law the
falling object can’t be colliding with any other object as well. Newton
Usually when the top of a building collapses we expect to see the falling part hit the structure bellow exerting a considerable force. But is not what occurs in WTC 7 and we know this because the top of WTC 7 fell at freefall, not near free fall. It fell by almost 2.5 seconds at a rate of free fall, i.e., 9,808 m/s2. If the top had crushed the part bellow, this parts would have reacted with a strength of the same intensity but opposite that would have decreased the acceleration of falling block. As the fall has not decreased, we conclude that the interaction force was zero in both directions.
An analysis was made by David Chandler and posted on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth#p/u/58/CpAp8eCEqNA) using an analysis software in a video made by CBS with a fixed camera pointed almost perpendicular to the north wall. This software allowed him to obtain data of distance and time as the building collapsed. From these data it was possible to calculate the speed (distance / time) of the building fall and acceleration (velocity / time) and build the graph below. The procedure was calibrated with the heights of two points in the building provided in the NIST report of August 2008. The measurements indicate that the building fell, for about 2.5 seconds in freefall. This is equivalent to eight floors in which the falling part did not find any resistance. For other eight floors met minimal resistance, and even then continued to accelerate, but at a lesser rate than free fall. Only after these 16 floors fall, began to have significant interaction with the structure and slowed down.
WTC 7 - Velocity x Time
In the graph we see that the horizontal axis is the measure of time in seconds and the vertical axis is the measure of velocity in meters per second. The rate is in negative numbers because is downward the same applies to the acceleration which is the relationship between velocity and time. We clearly see three stages of acceleration, the first lasting almost one second where the building flutters losing rigidity and begins to fall, the second is when we have the free fall acceleration, indicated by the blue line, for about 2.5 seconds and a third that lasts slightly less than one second where the rate of acceleration decreases and then it stops.
For those who are thinking that the free fall happens only for 2.5 seconds and not through all the collapse and can be explained to some extent if we consider the process as a whole make no mistake. The fact is that even 2.5 seconds of free fall is not consistent with any scenario involving natural weakening, bending or crushing because in this scenario there would be enormous forces of interaction with the structure bellow that would slow the fall. Knowing that even in controlled demolitions not enough structures are removed to allow free fall, how could a office fire be more destructive? Adding the support columns removal in sync around the building perimeter as seen by the unevenness of the top, by the abrupt collapse and the immediate transition to full support for free fall we concluded that a natural collapse with acceleration of gravity is not possible . But nevertheless occurred, meaning that it was not a natural collapse, other forces were involved, which destroyed the support columns of WTC 7.
David Chandler also has done an analysis of the collapse of the North Tower (WTC 1) which can be viewed on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=32-Ctx7MhKY). And just as the official explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 contradicts the laws of physics the explanation for WTC 1 is also inconsistent because the acceleration that the top of the tower acquires as it falls is a result of the building lower part disintegration and not the cause.
The twin towers of the WTC were destroyed from top to bottom, specifically the section of the building's 98th floor upwards seems to drop and accelerate towards the ground through the 98 floors below.
For the analysis he used a high-quality video of Etienne Sauret (similar version on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo) pointed to the north face, identifiable by the hole of the aircraft impact. The video was chosen because it shows an almost flat and perpendicular view of the tower’s face of a stationary camera in the distance. Using the video analysis it was possible to acquire data of distance and time and calculate the acceleration of the fall. The time base was calibrated with information from the NTSC standard i.e. 29.97 frames per second. The vertical scale was calibrated by the spacing between floors that is known,
3.66 meters. The vertical position of the roof
was mark every six frames (0.2 seconds) and the fall was follow until the
moment when the roof disappears behind the dust cloud, in other words by approximately
The data obtained is on the table below:
In the first column we have the frames (starts at 216 because the video does not begin at the time of the collapse), in the 2nd the time (the 0:00 is when the collapse starts), in the 3rd the vertical length and in the last the computed velocity. These data generated the graph below.
WTC 1 - Velocity x Time
The velocity vs. time graph shows an almost uniform acceleration of the 6th point computed on. When the roof starts to fall, quickly achieves an almost uniform acceleration of -6.31 m/s2.
The following analysis is based on the “pile-driver” theory of Bazant considering the top of the building as a solid mass m. The only relevant forces acting on the block in fall are the gravity (P = mg) and a normal force (N) upward due to the interaction with the building lower section. Applying
Second Law we have the resultant force (gravity minus the normal force) equals
mass times acceleration: Newton
mg - N = ma
reorganizing we have:
N = mg - ma
As shown in the graphic the acceleration (a) of the sixth point onward is -6.31 m/s2, which is the same as 64% of the acceleration of gravity (0.64g). So our equation becomes:
N = mg - 0,64mg = 0,36mg
Then the normal force (N) upward is 36% of the weight of the block that is on top as shown below.
's Third Law we get a very strange
situation. As the interaction forces are equal and opposite the falling block
exerts a force of only 36% of its weight in the lower section of the building.
In other words, since the falling block is accelerating we have a
counter-intuitive result that the force exerted on the lower section of the
building is significantly smaller than the static weight of the block. It's
hard to imagine how the upper block exerting a force of only 36% of the block static
weight could destroy the lower section bigger, stronger and with no damage when
the building itself was designed to handle several times its own weight. Newton
The fact that an accelerated block could exert a smaller force than its own weight in the target block can be intuitively difficult to accept, but that is because our experience tells us that the target block would resist the destructive impact. A hammer moving fast and hitting a nail into a solid block of wood normally exerts a force on the nail much greater than its own weight. But this is only true if the nail resists the impact. The biggest force driving the nail into the wood is matched by another force that simultaneously slows down the hammer, and that is why several blows are required. However, if the nail is placed in a block of polystyrene, it will not withstand the impact. He will be pushed into the block with very little strength. The hammer will find a resistance so low that will be able to accelerate all the time. In the case of WTC 1, the falling block acts as a hammer driving the nail to the polystyrene, but looking from another angle, is the interface between the blocks that is "soft". Another thing other than the falling block (explosives?) needs to be destroying the structural integrity of the interface zone that offers only a small fraction of the resistance that was designed.
Jonathan Cole has done experiments where he demonstrates how a falling object exerts a force smaller than its weight. The video is on YouTube and is called “9/11 Experiments:
vs. NIST” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=tejFUDlV81w). He also demonstrated how a block (the top of the building)
falling on top of a column of blocks mounted on top of each other (the rest of
the building) can not destroy the column. Video “Jonathan Cole - 9/11: Collapse
vs. Demolition” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkXeNawHFFo).
Those videos are very instructive to watch. Newton
Either way, they may want to argue that in terms of resistance of various materials, the impact of the falling block would destroy the lower section of the building, but the fact is that it could not destroy maintaining a constant acceleration. Also, if you look in terms of momentum we have that any increase in the force in the lower section of the building must be accompanied by a loss of momentum in the falling block to slow it down. So he should experience a "bump" that would be visible in the video. But the fact is that the block continues to move without slowing down, it is clear that there was no "bump" in spite of the sharp deflection of the building in the first three seconds.
Combining this analysis with the others evidences shown is clearly that some form of controlled demolition was happening, but not one as normally seen, because the building was destroyed from top to bottom, the wreckage were not contained within the footprint and various parts of the structure were ejected laterally by several meters, causing damage to adjacent buildings.
So we can conclude that once the collapse was not caused naturally, he was necessarily caused by man. And, as has been argued was a controlled demolition that clearly was planned before September 11. And if it was planned in advance so we have a conspiracy and not a conspiracy theory. Because it happened, and several people were necessarily involved in order to demolish the building which means that the U.S. government has blatantly lied to justify two invasions which defied International Law (UN Charter) and the Geneva Conventions and has killed more than 1.5 million people.
Now despite all that information you still has doubt that the
government would be able to lie about such a
thing, research about the incident. This
event is considered the main cause for the Gulf of Tonkin
entering in the Vietnam War. The official story was
that a U.S. U.S. ship had been attacked by North
Vietnamese in the .
But that story fell
apart when Daniel Elsberg leaked to the
media the Pentagon Papers with was a set
of documents that had been ordered
by the State Department to register the true
history of the
Vietnam War. Then we learned
that the Gulf of Tonkin Gulf
incident never happened, was manufactured for the population as a
justification for going to war U.S.
Other documents, declassified, which also suggest what the
government is capable are the Northwood Documents. With them we learn how the
military intended to shoot down airline airplanes, with or without passengers,
and blame U.S.
to justify an invasion in the 1960s. They were signed by the Joint Chiefs and
lacked only the signature of the president to be authorized. Cuba
Richard Feynman one of the greatest physicists of today, and one of the scientists responsible for discovering the cause of the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986, once said "No matter how beautiful your theory is, no matter how clever you are. If it does not agree with experiment, is wrong".
Most of the videos witch I refer can also be found on page http://911speakout.org along with more relevant information.
Destruction of the
Physics (Running Title: Downward Acceleration of WTC 1) by David Chandler World Trade
Freefall and Building 7 on 9/11 by David Chandler
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen, publish in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, volume 2, pg 7-31.
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 TRUTH
9/11: Blueprint For Truth – Richard Gage presentation of AE911Truth
Loose Change (final cut) by Dylan Avery
911 – In Plane Site (director’s cut) by Dave vonKleist & William Lewis
Zero: An Investigation Into 9-11 by Giulietto Chiesa, Franco Fracassi, Francesco Trento, Thomas Torelli & Paolo Jormi Bianchi