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

  • Thread starter Thread starter beardad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Building
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a claim that the World Trade Center buildings, including Building 7, fell faster than physics allows due to explosive charges. It is asserted that explosives would not cause the buildings to fall faster than terminal velocity; rather, they would undermine the structure, leading to a collapse under its own weight. The topic of 9/11 conspiracy theories is deemed inappropriate for discussion in this forum, as it is considered a waste of bandwidth. The forum rules explicitly prohibit such discussions. Overall, the claim of explosive charges causing an accelerated fall is dismissed as unfounded.
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:
Thread 'Is there a white hole inside every black hole?'
This is what I am thinking. How much feasible is it? There is a white hole inside every black hole The white hole spits mass/energy out continuously The mass/energy that is spit out of a white hole drops back into it eventually. This is because of extreme space time curvature around the white hole Ironically this extreme space time curvature of the space around a white hole is caused by the huge mass/energy packed in the white hole Because of continuously spitting mass/energy which keeps...
Why do two separately floating objects in a liquid "attract" each other ?? What if gravity is an emergent property like surface tension ? What if they both are essentially trying to *minimize disorder at the interfaces — where non-aligned polarized particles are forced to mix with each other* What if gravity is an emergent property that is trying to optimize the entropy emerging out of spin aligned quantum bits
Back
Top