Originally Posted by
DGM
Can't wait to read the results. Will there be a tie into explosives if you succeed in showing the NIST hypothesis wrong? If so, will there be any supporting evidence (besides "it could only be because it looks like it")?
I also look forward to seeing the results. That the NIST hypothesis is wrong is proven already, in the context of the specifics of the beam expansion that they claimed.
Personally, I would like to see a set of conditions imposed that would replicate what NIST supposed re the girder walk off, though it is hard to imagine what those conditions could be given that the column retains enough lateral support to prevent the seat moving East.
Usmani managed to dance around the issue in Glasgow a few months back. The prospect of defending NISTs explanation against a model whos inputs are known is not something so easily danced around.