IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags wtc , Zdenek Bazant

Reply
Old 26th October 2008, 06:00 PM   #41
Mince
Master Poster
 
Mince's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,009
I found a picture of Heiwa from the archives.


Mince is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:01 PM   #42
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
"Do you know what this mean????? It means this damn thing doesnt work at all!!!"

lolol

=)
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:06 PM   #43
technoextreme
Illuminator
 
technoextreme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,785
Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post


Okay, this convinces me more than ever that he's trying to pull off a dumb joke. No one can possibly be this benighted.
Ehhhh... This is the truth movement we are talking. Even I'm amazed to the extent at how much they take a cleaver to the field of science.
__________________
It's amazing how many of these "paranormal" icons seem to merge together. There always seem to be theories about how they link together in some way. I'm sure someone has a very good explanation as to how Bigfoot killed JFK to help cover Roswell.-Mark Mekes
This isn't rocket surgery.-Bill Nye
technoextreme is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:08 PM   #44
Zipster
Thinker
 
Zipster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 178
I made a slight change to Heiwa's experiment. Instead of using myself (and risking leg injury), I used a stack of textbooks (tied together) roughly my own weight (200 lbs). This should be a perfectly acceptable substitute.

The scale registered 202.1 lbs when I put the books on top. I then brought the scale outside, made sure it was zeroed and dropped the same stack of textbooks from my second story window.

My scale is broken because the display permanently shows the words "ERR". If Heiwa was right (which he isn't), the scale would still be fine and show the normal zeroed "0.0" on it. But instead, the force of the stack of textbooks being dropped from the second story window overloaded the sensor in my scale.

Time to buy another one!
__________________
The fire commander was not a memeber of the FDNY at that time, he was in charge of all the units there. That means police, rescue, contractors, demo. -ULTIMA1

Last time i checked the FDR is not a part from the plane. -ULTIMA1

Last edited by Zipster; 26th October 2008 at 06:10 PM.
Zipster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:09 PM   #45
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
Let's stick to the subject.
Obviously, the H guy has not tried this himself...
Make it easy. Drop a 5 pound brick on the scale, after weighing it statically.
That way you don't break stuff--or not badly...

For the fence-sitting lurkers

(since I've given up on Heiwa)

Importantly: Video tape the experiment, and record the weight reading in each frame.
Plot the recordings with respect to time.

It predict that the period of time when the force registering is greater than the weight of the brick will exactly match the time between initial impact and the brick coming to a stop.

It will be quick, so a high-speed camera would help.

A simpler method is to have a scale that will record the maximum force.



Then, a simple calculation will verify the F=ma equation.

t1 = initial contact time
t2 = time when brick velocity = 0
v1 = velocity at impact (= [2gd]0.5 where d = distance dropped)
v2 = velocity at time stopped (=0, obviously)

a = (v2 - v1)/(t2 - t1)

m is the mass of the brick.

F will be equal (within experimental error) to the average reading on the scale over the time of impact (t2 - t1).

F will also be higher than mg.


I like this experiment. It once again proves me and Dave Rogers are correct (ref. to the Pizza Tower thread) when we stated that in order to bring a falling object to a stop (which requires change in velocity, defined as acceleration) requires a retarding force greater than the weight of the falling object.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis

Last edited by X; 26th October 2008 at 06:11 PM.
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:09 PM   #46
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
Originally Posted by dtugg View Post
Just to be clear, an object's mass does not increase with velocity (not unless it is going really, really fast, like approaching the speed of light).

It's momentum and the force that it would apply on another object does increase with velocity however. In this case, the weight (which is a measurement of force) that a scale reads when you jump on it.
ah. so what is the mass X velocity? is that force?
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:11 PM   #47
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Tagger
 
TJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 21,899
Originally Posted by 240-185 View Post
I thought french troofers were the stupidest guys on Earth, I was wrong.
Now now, be nice. Truthers are just stupid, regardless of nationality.
TJM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:12 PM   #48
alexi_drago
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,353
To get more of an idea of the forces involved you should be landing on the scales from the 3.7m test height with knees locked, not doing so will result in a longer deceleraton time so a lower decelerating force is required and registered by the scales.
alexi_drago is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:15 PM   #49
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
Originally Posted by alexi_drago View Post
To get more of an idea of the forces involved you should be landing on the scales from the 3.7m test height with knees locked, not doing so will result in a longer deceleraton time so a lower decelerating force is required and registered by the scales.
THat's why I recommended the brick...
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:17 PM   #50
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
ah. so what is the mass X velocity? is that force?
That's called Momentum.

P = mv


It's not really a force..
The units of momentum are mass*distance/time (for example: kg*m/s).
The units of a force (Newtons) are mass*distance/time/time (for example: kg*m/sec2).


Energy (kinetic) is 0.5*mv2, and has units (called Joules, which are also writen as Netowns per second) of mass*distance*distance/time/time (for example: kg*m2/sec2).
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:17 PM   #51
Doctor Evil
Master Poster
 
Doctor Evil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,014
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
ah. so what is the mass X velocity? is that force?
Mass times velocity is called momentum. The rate of change of momentum (with time) is equal to the force acting on a body. (This is one of Newton laws).

The notion of force is useful since we know several types of forces and can compute them independently of Newton laws. A relevant exampe here is gravity.
__________________
"ut biberent, quando esse nollent " (if they will not eat, then they will drink) -- Publius Claudius Pulcher

"In this universe, effect follows cause. I've complained about it but ... " -- House
Doctor Evil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:18 PM   #52
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Doctor Evil View Post
Mass times velocity is called momentum. The rate of change of momentum (with time) is equal to the force acting on a body. (This is one of Newton laws).

The notion of force is useful since we know several types of forces and can compute them independently of Newton laws. A relevant exampe here is gravity.

I win.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:27 PM   #53
Zipster
Thinker
 
Zipster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 178
I found something that everyone might find interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfTE4J87aQQ

Watch the first few minutes. It pretty much explains everything we're talking about here. An MIT professor refutes Heiwa completely!

Simply put, Fscale = m * (a + g). (a + g) determines the multiplying factor of how "heavy" the scale thinks you are. The higher your velocity when you hit the scale (or in the elevator example given, moving up or down), the "heavier" you are.

Since I'm on His Royal Arrogance's ignore list, would someone who's not on ignore like to repeat all of this or at least repost the lecture video link and see what he says?
__________________
The fire commander was not a memeber of the FDNY at that time, he was in charge of all the units there. That means police, rescue, contractors, demo. -ULTIMA1

Last time i checked the FDR is not a part from the plane. -ULTIMA1

Last edited by Zipster; 26th October 2008 at 06:29 PM.
Zipster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:37 PM   #54
Doctor Evil
Master Poster
 
Doctor Evil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,014
Originally Posted by [X] View Post
I win.
Fine. I owe you a cookie.
__________________
"ut biberent, quando esse nollent " (if they will not eat, then they will drink) -- Publius Claudius Pulcher

"In this universe, effect follows cause. I've complained about it but ... " -- House
Doctor Evil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:40 PM   #55
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Zipster View Post
I found something that everyone might find interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfTE4J87aQQ

Watch the first few minutes. It pretty much explains everything we're talking about here. An MIT professor refutes Heiwa completely!

Simply put, Fscale = m * (a + g). (a + g) determines the multiplying factor of how "heavy" the scale thinks you are. The higher your velocity when you hit the scale (or in the elevator example given, moving up or down), the "heavier" you are.

Since I'm on His Royal Arrogance's ignore list, would someone who's not on ignore like to repeat all of this or at least repost the lecture video link and see what he says?


Embedded:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE





And Dr Evil: It had better be chocolate chip.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:42 PM   #56
Zipster
Thinker
 
Zipster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 178
Thank you [X]. I await his reply to the video.

Probably something along the lines of "the MIT professor must be into 'NWO physics' too!"...
__________________
The fire commander was not a memeber of the FDNY at that time, he was in charge of all the units there. That means police, rescue, contractors, demo. -ULTIMA1

Last time i checked the FDR is not a part from the plane. -ULTIMA1
Zipster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:44 PM   #57
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Zipster View Post
Thank you [X]. I await his reply to the video.

Probably something along the lines of "the MIT professor must be into 'NWO physics' too!"...

You owe me a cookie, too.


And if Heiwa follows form, he'll acknowledge that the MIT professors physics are correct, buy somehow they don't apply in the static (yes, I know it's dynamic, but Heiwa insists it can be analyzed statically) scenario case Heiwa is discussing.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:48 PM   #58
Homeland Insurgency
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,705
When one engineer implies NIST is off base and the next engineer implies NIST is gospel...

which engineer is full of crap?
Homeland Insurgency is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:51 PM   #59
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
When one engineer implies NIST is off base and the next engineer implies NIST is gospel...

which engineer is full of crap?
false choice logical fallacy noted
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:51 PM   #60
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
When one engineer implies NIST is off base and the next engineer implies NIST is gospel...

which engineer is full of crap?
what does this have to do with the utter absurdity of the OT?
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:56 PM   #61
Homeland Insurgency
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,705
Originally Posted by parky76 View Post
what does this have to do with the utter absurdity of the OT?
Well I have to admit when I jump on my scale it spikes.

But what does that mean? Why are you here?

Is it all settled because my scale spikes?

9/11 that is.

Why not?
Homeland Insurgency is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 06:59 PM   #62
Whiplash
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,443
Heiwa, I have it on good authority that if you jump from 3.7 meters into a pool of pirahna fish, you will see God.
Whiplash is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:02 PM   #63
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
Well I have to admit when I jump on my scale it spikes.

But what does that mean? Why are you here?

Is it all settled because my scale spikes?

9/11 that is.

Why not?
And.. you do it all over again
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:03 PM   #64
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Doctor Evil View Post
Mass times velocity is called momentum.
No, no, no... momentum is like when when an NCAA team has a long winning streak going into the tournament!



__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:05 PM   #65
MarkCorrigan
Penultimate Amazing
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,895
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
Well I have to admit when I jump on my scale it spikes.

But what does that mean? Why are you here?

Is it all settled because my scale spikes?

9/11 that is.

Why not?
I'll be honest with you, the fact that your scale spikes is not proof of 9/11 being exactly how NIST described it.

That, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with the point of this thread, which is Heiwa describing an "experiment" which he says proves his ideas about physics, and everyone else schooling him.
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:05 PM   #66
Homeland Insurgency
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,705
Originally Posted by A W Smith View Post
God is dead... or... never was?
Homeland Insurgency is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:10 PM   #67
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
Well I have to admit when I jump on my scale it spikes.

But what does that mean? Why are you here?

Is it all settled because my scale spikes?

9/11 that is.

Why not?


Not quite.

Heiwa is still arguing that a resistance force equal to the weight of a falling object can bring it to rest.
In support of this absurd idea, he has trotted out this experiment involving a scale, claiming that since it shows reading A when the load is static, and shows the same value (reading A) after impact (when the downward motion of the load has stopped) that it therefore proves that a resisting object (the object being impacted) can only provide a force equal to the force of gravity on the impacting object.

What he forgets (and this is a major flaw) is that decelerating the falling object to a stop is a dynamic situation.

Imparting acceleration on mass requires a net force, so merely balancing the force due to gravity will result not in the mass slowing its descent (which is what Heiwa claims happens) but rather in the mass continuing it's motion at constant velocity.

I proved this here and here (correction to second post here.

Heiwa showed he understands the physics of the situation here, but by the miracle of doublethink still clings tenaciously, even doggedly, to his fatally-flawed preconception.


Hope that helps explain the situation.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:17 PM   #68
Homeland Insurgency
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,705
Originally Posted by [X] View Post
Not quite.

Heiwa is still arguing that a resistance force equal to the weight of a falling object can bring it to rest.
In support of this absurd idea, he has trotted out this experiment involving a scale, claiming that since it shows reading A when the load is static, and shows the same value (reading A) after impact (when the downward motion of the load has stopped) that it therefore proves that a resisting object (the object being impacted) can only provide a force equal to the force of gravity on the impacting object.

What he forgets (and this is a major flaw) is that decelerating the falling object to a stop is a dynamic situation.

Imparting acceleration on mass requires a net force, so merely balancing the force due to gravity will result not in the mass slowing its descent (which is what Heiwa claims happens) but rather in the mass continuing it's motion at constant velocity.

I proved this here and here (correction to second post here.

Heiwa showed he understands the physics of the situation here, but by the miracle of doublethink still clings tenaciously, even doggedly, to his fatally-flawed preconception.


Hope that helps explain the situation.
Not quite? What are you fighting and why? That is if no one believes it? Is there no one with the same degrees who doesn't buy into NIST? Why isn't it obvious to all? Please explain why you are here.
Homeland Insurgency is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:28 PM   #69
Thunder
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
I am ready to argue that most Americans have no freaking idea what a "NIST" is.
Thunder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 07:33 PM   #70
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
Not quite? What are you fighting and why? That is if no one believes it? Is there no one with the same degrees who doesn't buy into NIST? Why isn't it obvious to all? Please explain why you are here.
You agree with Heiwa HI?
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 08:37 PM   #71
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Homeland Insurgency View Post
Not quite? What are you fighting and why? That is if no one believes it? Is there no one with the same degrees who doesn't buy into NIST? Why isn't it obvious to all? Please explain why you are here.

You asked a question. More to the point, you actually asked a relevant question. I took you off ignore for that. Congratulations, don't make me regret it.

I am no longer discussing this with Heiwa, due to his blatant dishonesty. But I will provide explanations to people on the fence, or leaning toward his hypothesis.

That is why I am here, right now, in this thread.

Why? Because I think it's valuable to see the kind of error-ridden physics Heiwa uses.

Think about it: if he can not even apply elementary-school physics correctly, if he cannot differentiate between static (stationary) and dynamic (moving) systems, how likely is he to be correct in his analyses?


I am merely showing that his physics is hopelessly in error. Without correcting it (he refuses to acknowledge the error, despite demonstrating that he knows the correct physics (see my previous post)), his model will never be right. And by showing this error and Heiwa's callous refusal to correct it, I hope to demonstrate to people sitting on the fence (you, I am thinking) that, if nothing else, Heiwa's physics should not be trusted.


I have made no comment about NIST, no comment about Bazant, indeed no comment about any model of the collapse except Heiwa's. And I have shown explicitly and repeatedly that Heiwa's model is based on shoddy physics.

I have never even read NIST or Bazant, in point of fact.

You are free to follow whatever model you wish. Just beware that at least this one is based on incorrect foundations.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis

Last edited by X; 26th October 2008 at 08:39 PM.
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 09:01 PM   #72
Mr.D
Self Assessed Dunning-Kruger Expert
 
Mr.D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,178
New result!

In the interest of science, I decided to improve on Heiwa's experiments by combining them. After all, if a stack of pizza boxes is a good model of a WTC Tower, and jumping on a scale is a good model of the initiating event, then surely combining them must make an even better model!

So, I obtained a dozen Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pizza boxes and glued them together into a stack. Next to that, I stood the tallest ladder I could get my hands on and carried my bathroom scale up with me to the top. It was a little hard to measure the exact height, but I held the scale approximately 3.4 meters above the little PPP tower and let go.

To my surprise, the pizza box tower collapsed globally when the scale hit it!

I thereby conclude that Heiwa's analysis has in fact been correct all along, only he failed to take his experiments further towards their logical conclusion - The WTC Towers were destroyed by scales! I suspect Jenny Craig.


Next up: What happens when you scale* a scale** tower and drop a scale*** on it.

* = proportional measurement
** = of the bathroom variety
*** = fish part

Last edited by Mr.D; 26th October 2008 at 09:03 PM.
Mr.D is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 09:15 PM   #73
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,577
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post
Next up: What happens when you scale* a scale** tower and drop a scale*** on it.

But first calculate the mass of the scale, which is a scalar.
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 09:32 PM   #74
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Zipster View Post
I found something that everyone might find interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfTE4J87aQQ

Watch the first few minutes. It pretty much explains everything we're talking about here. An MIT professor refutes Heiwa completely!

Simply put, Fscale = m * (a + g). (a + g) determines the multiplying factor of how "heavy" the scale thinks you are. The higher your velocity when you hit the scale (or in the elevator example given, moving up or down), the "heavier" you are.

Since I'm on His Royal Arrogance's ignore list, would someone who's not on ignore like to repeat all of this or at least repost the lecture video link and see what he says?


Having watched the lecture, which is not only more interesting than I remember my physics lectures being, but also more understandable (evidently I have learned something in my Engineering studies), I feel I should highlight the time in the video that illustrates Heiwa's error.

It is from 29 minutes in to 31 minutes in. For a fuller explanation (and an experiment that is almost exactly what Heiwa ordered) keep watching until 40 minutes in.
The professor explains the concept quite clearly.
It proves Dave Rogers and myself correct (again) in the Pizza Box thread, and more importantly exposes Heiwa's elementary error (repeated from the other thread) for what it is. Garbage physics.

I predict he'll say that since the scale in the experiment bounced, it proved him right. If he does so, bear in mind that a foam cushion (what the scale landed on) is NOT analogous to a steel skyscraper or a rubber ball.

The claim that a falling mass can be brought to a stop by a resistance equal to the force of gravity on the falling mass is WRONG!

So, to all you fence-sitters out there, watch the lecture, read the links I posted in my first response to Homeland Insurgency, and ask yourself: Do you really think Heiwa's physics describe reality?

Do yourself a favor, find a different model.



Only one question remains: Why is the prof wearing a bagel?
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis

Last edited by X; 26th October 2008 at 09:50 PM.
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 10:01 PM   #75
Zipster
Thinker
 
Zipster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 178
It's for his free lunch! Duh! And I do owe you a cookie [X] for reposting my post.

I would suggest Heiwa watch continue to watch until the 40 minute mark. The professor does an actual demonstration of what he explains in the 29 to 31 minute range. Just to drive the point home to Heiwa (and any others who are on the fence) who would probably just argue that the professor's only "talking NWO nonsense" from the 29 to 31 minute range.

I'm surprised I found this video in the first place! Good old MIT professors come through again! I'm going to get myself a cookie.

Now we've thoroughly debunked Heiwa Physics! For the up-tenth time in a row.
__________________
The fire commander was not a memeber of the FDNY at that time, he was in charge of all the units there. That means police, rescue, contractors, demo. -ULTIMA1

Last time i checked the FDR is not a part from the plane. -ULTIMA1

Last edited by Zipster; 26th October 2008 at 10:03 PM.
Zipster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 10:09 PM   #76
X
Slide Rulez 4 Life
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,127
Originally Posted by Zipster View Post
It's for his free lunch! Duh! And I do owe you a cookie [X] for reposting my post.

Make it bagel.
__________________
It is sad that this is necessary:
Argumentum Ad Hominem: "You are wrong because you are ugly."
Not Ad-Hom: "You are wrong and you are ugly."

[X's posts are] ...as good as having 24 hours of Justin Bieber piped into your ears! - kmortis
X is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 10:26 PM   #77
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,282
Originally Posted by Hokulele View Post
But first calculate the mass of the scale, which is a scalar.
*Groans*
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 10:27 PM   #78
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Zipster View Post
My scale is broken because the display permanently shows the words "ERR". If Heiwa was right (which he isn't), the scale would still be fine and show the normal zeroed "0.0" on it. But instead, the force of the stack of textbooks being dropped from the second story window overloaded the sensor in my scale.

Time to buy another one!
Yeah, but it probably read 202 right before breaking, right? Oh, this thread is a hoot. Heiwa, you know the funny thing is, the other one was started by someone else, and maybe they could be accused of misrepresentin'. But this is your own experiment in your own thread! Dude, I've observed a scale needle bouncing up and down as I just stand there and bob up and down on my toes.

I mean, I'm totally dumb (more lazy actually) when it comes to the finer points of science stuff but you say:
Quote:
As JREF posters discussing the WTC1 collapse on the Pizza Box Tower thread don't know the difference between weight/mass (kg) and force (N) and moving bodies
As others have pointed out, you have these lumped wrong - heiwa can't tell the difference between weight/force and mass.

Quote:
OK, but you normally do not measure your weight by jumping from 3.7 meters on your bathroom scale! So whatever you measure then, was not your weight.
So the relevance is that the falling portion of the towers might impact with something other than (greater than) its static weight? Wow! Where did I see that same contention just earlier today? Are we getting somewhere?
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 10:43 PM   #79
Jonnyclueless
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,546
Now wait, are we supposed to put the pizza on the scale? Is that where this is going?
Jonnyclueless is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th October 2008, 11:03 PM   #80
JohnG
Pedantic Bore
 
JohnG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Abandon All Hope
Posts: 6,808
Originally Posted by Heiwa View Post
Assume you are in the bathroom and step on the scale and that it announces that your weight it 120 kgs (or what ever that is in US - 20 inches)! OK, you are only 160 cms (what is that - 3 lbs?) tall, so you are a small, fat weight, but who cares. Most Americans are overweight.

This has to be some sort of performance art.
__________________
Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand. - Baruch Spinoza
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. - Harlan Ellison
JohnG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:39 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.