Can Explosives Really Make a Building Fall Faster Than Physics Allows?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter beardad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Building
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the claims regarding the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings and Building #7, specifically whether explosives could have caused them to fall faster than the laws of physics would allow, including considerations of terminal velocity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that explosives could not cause the buildings to fall faster than terminal velocity, suggesting that the explosions merely undermined the structure, leading to a collapse under its own weight.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the claims made by a colleague, labeling them as unfounded and questioning the validity of the explosive theory.
  • There is a mention of the topic being banned on the forum, indicating a restriction on discussing conspiracy theories related to the 9/11 events.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are conflicting views regarding the validity of the explosive theory and the nature of the building collapses. The discussion remains unresolved with respect to the claims made.

Contextual Notes

The discussion is limited by forum rules that prohibit conspiracy theory discussions, which may affect the depth and breadth of the arguments presented.

beardad
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
A fellow I work with claims that the world trade center buildings and building # 7 fell faster than physics will allow. He thinks that explosive charges placed in the buildings caused the buildings to fall faster than terminal velosity? I think he is a quack. how can I show him he is a quack. or is he right? thanks for your time
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is one of the banned topics on PF/Skepticism Forum.

Zz.
 
beardad said:
A fellow I work with claims that the world trade center buildings and building # 7 fell faster than physics will allow. He thinks that explosive charges placed in the buildings caused the buildings to fall faster than terminal velosity? I think he is a quack. how can I show him he is a quack. or is he right? thanks for your time
And your friend is wrong. Explosives placed in the building would not cause it to fall faster. The explosions simply undermine the structure, which then collapses under its own weight.
 
Sorry, but discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories is not allowed here. (They just waste bandwidth!) Consult our "Rules" at the top of each page, especially the section on Conspiracy Theories/Closed topics. A list of such closed topics can be found in the https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=71194&postcount=1".

Thanks for understanding. :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

High School Sympathetic motion generated by cleaning Rubik's cube
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
High School How Does Blackbird Leverage Wind Power to Move Faster Than the Wind?
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
17K
High School Filming a passing road sign: speed vs bumpiness
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
High School Normal Force Discrepancy for Wedge Vs. Ramp
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
High School Transferring information faster than the speed of light
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
High School Where am I wrong in this travelling faster than light Idea I've had?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
Undergrad Can a Magnet Make Objects Fall Faster than Terminal Velocity?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Intro Physics What Book Helps Understand Electromagnetism and Quantum Physics Concepts?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Falling Physics: Calculating Speed for 5'11" 195 lbs. Man in D&D Battle
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad No relativistic Bohmian mechanics and superluminal causation
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K