Search results

you just described demolishing a building top-down

No. It required bracing from the surrounding structure to be stable. The core was not involved in the ROOSD, as the spire proves. (I wonder why you don't recall me telling you about this.)

At independence in 1980, the Government of Zimbabwe established the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, which was mandated with protecting Zimbabwe’s natural resources and promoting tourism in the country. In the early 90s, the Ministry was renamed the Ministry of Environment and Tourism.

a) they are not bombings b) didn't you say the charge is placed only halfway up?

OOS means open office space, so obviously, a traditional skyscraper (e.g. the Empire State Building) lacking a column-less open office space can not undergo ROOSD. There are probably other structures that could undergo similar failures.

I'm not trying to convince other people, I'm trying to convince you. If you say you hate maths and suck at physics, you'll never know; but at least then you know why there is a limit to your understanding. Nobody demolishes buildings top-down, because it is much more dangerous than the...

But the assumption that the pandemic has lured more people into the ranks of conspiracy theorists is mistaken, according to a representative study by the Institute for Delinquency and Crime Prevention at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW). In 2018, 36% of Swiss still believed in...

I've suggested a companion wiki to store the info, and collaborate in editing and organizing it.

But only 2 tall buildings destroyed by aircraft. There is a reason for that. Think!

There is no contradiction. a) the FAQ was written later b) the FAQ #18 does not "calculate"/simulate the actual collapse, it makes a simplified argument why progressive collapse ensued and could not be arrested. There is no reason for you to ignore it, except that its truth is inconvenient to you.

I wanted to reset the intuition that a very long cascade from a small initial impulse is possible. Source: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4_qDAhVa7yc There's no reason to be incredulous about it.

I did. Repeatedly. Referencing NIST FAQ #18. That's why I wrote that "you deliberately maintain your incredulity by refusing to acknowledge the main structural features of the WTC." They're the only examples of skyscrapers brought down by airliners, too. Stack a dozen empty pizza boxes (tape...

but why? those buildings weren't even steel framed you deliberately maintain your incredulity by refusing to acknowledge the main structural features of the WTC. You want to make statements about it without actually furthering your understanding. Is this your actual aim? 5 mm domino topples 1m...

horizontal 60⁰, or diagonal 60⁰?

Why does a jackhammer work the way it does? The columns carried the weight of the upper floors, the floors did not. This is offtopic here, please see my bookshelf question in the other thread...

Yes but then why the constant comparisons to CD ("verinage")? How to topple the top block at the (essentially random) aircraft strike level? how to effect collapse from it that "would surely arrest by itself", unless you can control demolition all the way down, without sight of the building...

A simple structure like a chimney can be prepared for a controlled demolition in less than a week but larger, more complex or multiple structures can take up to six months of preparation to remove internal walls, drilling holes for placing of explosives, wrapping columns with fabric and fencing...

It didn't.

well, if you had 100 shelves in that bookcase....

@Henkka are the shelves at the bottom sturdier than the shelves at the top? or are they the same?