Building Collapses: Examining the Physics and Symmetry of the Twin Towers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Studiot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Building
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the collapse of the Twin Towers, questioning the uniformity of their fall despite differing collision impacts. A colleague argues that the identical nature of the collapses contradicts basic physics principles, suggesting it is unnatural for buildings to fall directly into their footprints. However, others assert that similar structural designs lead to predictable collapse modes, regardless of the damage. The conversation highlights skepticism towards conspiracy theories and emphasizes that professional engineering studies support the understanding of the collapses. Overall, the uniformity of the collapse is framed as a common aspect of physics rather than an anomaly.
Studiot
Messages
5,440
Reaction score
10
I have received the following private message.

Questions should not be asked this way.
However it is a reasonable question so all may benefit from the answer.

A colleague friend ...security edit... makes the claim that regardless of how any of the buildings came down, simple physics should make one question how two completely different collisions, causing completely different damage, caused identical collapses. That the uniformity is "so unnatural, so contrary to everything you learn in physics," one has to question why the buildings didn't topple, instead falling directly into their respective foot prints. That it is untrue that this "lottery ticket chance" of an accident caused an unpredictable collapse, to collapse predictably.

He also claims that the problem of symmetry is never addressed...by anyone. ever.

I do not know much about the structure of the twin towers but observe that since they are likely to be of similar framed construction they will likely be subject to similar collapse modes.

Collapse modes are mostly determined by the structure, rather than the damage.

Any civil engineer should know this.

The following is all about a very famous 'stack of cards' UK collapse that many structures are at risk of.

http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&xhr=...i=&aql=&oq=ronan+po&pbx=1&fp=c5f282700dc45ac9
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
I don't know, Stu, but you might want to steer clear of responding to that PM.
Sounds like a conspiracy theorists' take on the twin tower collapse.

The impacts/collapses have been studied and modeled ad-nauseum by professional engineers. Their findings agree with the majority public perception of aircraft strikes.

But forget all that in conversation with him.
Trust me, it is IMPOSSIBLE to reason with a conspiracy theorist.

I would just leave it alone and move on.
 
Yah I don't even exactly know what he's talking about, but those kinds of people are impossible to deal with.

I do like the idea that uniformity is 100% contrary to physics. Isn't the first thing all students learn in physics for the first couple of semesters is the fact that many many things act in uniform ways? Objects fall at uniform accelerations, simple harmonic oscillators will oscillate uniformly, etc etc.
 
Hi all, i have some questions about the tesla turbine: is a tesla turbine more efficient than a steam engine or a stirling engine ? about the discs of the tesla turbine warping because of the high speed rotations; does running the engine on a lower speed solve that or will the discs warp anyway after time ? what is the difference in efficiency between the tesla turbine running at high speed and running it at a lower speed ( as fast as possible but low enough to not warp de discs) and: i...

Similar threads

Back
Top