Thread: Loose Change
View Single Post
Old 11th May 2006, 07:05 AM   #3439
Dr Adequate
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17,766
Originally Posted by Xraye View Post
physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Here's a research paper by Professor Steven E Jones, a physics professor
That's not a "research paper", that's a website. Research papers are submitted to research journals, where they undergo peer review.

Professor Jones could do with a little peer review, especially as he's often talking about areas outside of his own expertise.

When he does talk about physics he is profoundly disappointing :

Quote:
... with the upper part falling nearly as rapidly as ejected debris which provide free-fall references (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/anal...fs/speed.html; Griffin, 2004, chapter 2). Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum – one of the foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors – and intact steel support columns – the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass.
Well Professor Jones --- may I call you "Jonesy"? --- there are indeed laws of physics. And they are a set of quantitive equations. And it is, stop me if I'm wrong, YOUR JOB, TRADE, AND PROFESSION TO APPLY THEM TO PHYSICAL SITUATIONS. So why don't you?

He admits that the building is not in fact falling at free-fall acceleration. So the next step would be to find out what the acceleration is, and so how much resistance the collapse met with.

It's his JOB to do stuff like that. But he hasn't. This is why this is not, and never will be, a "research paper". Scientists have a very expressive phrase for an argument in this stage of development. They call it "handwaving".

Last edited by Dr Adequate; 11th May 2006 at 07:37 AM.
Dr Adequate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top