Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #519468 > unrolled thread

The Progressive Collapse Challenge

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  The Progressive Collapse Challenge "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2015-09-06 21:42 -0500
    Re: Rocky has a new delusion jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-07 03:28 +0000

#519468 — The Progressive Collapse Challenge

I just saw The Progressive Collapse Challenge for the first time today and 
basically it is to challenge anybody to build a building out of anything 
they want to build it out of that will collapse from the top down.  <G>

Here are some of the points to it.

THE PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE CHALLENGE

The challenge is in 5 parts, from the easiest to the most difficult.

All five require building a structure that will undergo top-down progressive 
total collapse -- i.e.: when disturbed near the top, it will collapse from 
the top down to the bottom, leaving no part standing. The disturbance can 
include mechanical force, such as projectile impacts, and fires, augmented 
with hydrocarbon fuels. Explosives and electromagnetic energy beams are not 
permitted.

Your structure can be made out of anything: straws, toothpicks, cards, 
dominoes, mud, vegetables, pancakes, etc.

The designers of the Twin Towers were able to meet all 5 challenges using 
steel and concrete.



CHALLENGE #1:

Build a structure with a vertical aspect ratio of at least 2 (twice as tall 
as it is wide) and induce it to undergo top-down total progressive collapse.

CHALLENGE #2:

Build a structure with a square footprint and a vertical aspect ratio of at 
least 6.5 (6.5 times as high as it is wide), and induce it to undergo 
top-down total progressive collapse.

CHALLENGE #3:

Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which, in the process of 
collapsing, will throw pieces outward in all directions such that at least 
80% of the mass of the materials ends up lying outside of the footprint, but 
their center of mass lies inside the footprint.

CHALLENGE #4:

Build a structure as required by CHALLENGE #2 which is capable of remaining 
intact in 100 MPH cross wind.

CHALLENGE #5:

Build a structure that meets the requirements of both CHALLENGES #3 and #4.

 http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/challenge.html

But sadly NIST has an easy way to win the above challenge and that is with 
more of their cartoons.  <G>

Rocky 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#519477 — Re: Rocky has a new delusion

In sci.physics Rocky <wookiee@att.net> wrote:
> I just saw The Progressive Collapse Challenge for the first time today and 
> basically it is to challenge anybody to build a building out of anything 
> they want to build it out of that will collapse from the top down.

Set fire to the top of it, you delusional, jobless stalker.

<snip kook ravings>

The facts are some airliners were hijacked.

Two of them crashed into the World Trade Center towers, starting fires
which weakened the central support columns and the buildings collapesed
almost 2 hours later.

One of them crashed into the Pentagon causing a partial collapse of the
western side and one of them crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.

When a nuclear device explodes, it creates a unique seismic signature
that can be detected anywhere on the planet.

There were no nuclear seismic signatures detected on 9/11 but the 
collapse of the two towers as well as the plane crash at the Pentagon
and the crash in Pennsyvania were detected.

This alone is enough to disprove any nuclear devices were used on 9/11.

Everything else is kook babble.

That there were nuclear exposives involved is kook babble.

That there is missing rubble is kook babble.

That there has ever been a nuclear building demolition is kook babble.

That part of the buildings were vaporized is kook babble.

That part of a building was left standing proves there were nuclear
devices is kook babble.

That there was an EMP is kook babble.

That nuclear devices could be detonated underground and yet were not
seen by every seismograph in the world is kook babble.

That a failed US Government project that ended in 1973 has anything
to do with what happened is kook babble.

That the scene was radioactive is kook babble.

That there is any simularity between New York and either Hiroshima
or Nagasaki is kook babble.

That the area was called ground zero proves the event was nuclear
is kook babble.

That a nuclear bomb can be buried for decades without maintenance 
and still be expected to work is kook babble.

That non-government entities can obtain not one, but multiple nuclear
bombs is kook babble.

That there were not thousands of eyewitnesses who heard and saw the
airplanes hit the towers is kook babble.

That all the video was CGI is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were designed to deflect airplanes is kook babble.

That the exterior walls were anything other than supports for the
windows is kook babble.

That two of the aircraft landed somewhere else is kook babble.

That a shotgun works anything like an underground nuclear explosion
is kook babble.

There is nothing in an airplane that transmits the flight number to
ATC and saying the transponder does that is kook babble.

Saying a missile of any kind hit the Pentagon is kook babble.

Rantings about specially treated dirt is kook babble.

Saying people worship their television and capitalizing "television" is
kook babble.

Capitalizing things that shouldn't be capitalized is kook babble.


<snip remaining kook babble>



-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web