We previously saw a Fox News pie chart that had a couple extra slices (here). Now, fair and balanced math adds up to 120 percent of voters indicating that they view the science on global warming to be rigged.
This is an interesting Rasmussen poll when you add up the number and discover that you are in a parallel universe.
The question is: “In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?” According to the poll, 35 percent thought it very likely, 24 percent somewhat likely, 21 percent not very likely, and 5 percent not likely at all (15 percent weren’t sure).
This rather dubious poll is offered to show that people are dubious about the science and math of global warming experts.
For the full story, click here
Byron: “why does thermite necessarily need to be the reason for heat at the site?”
I didn’t say it was necessary, I said as of April of 2009, it had been established that there was evidence if active thermitic material found in the debris of ground zero.
The implication being, if we can’t account for nearly six months of steel existing at or near the heat of fusion, MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, there were other factors besides gravity at work.
Taking Byron’s 4.5 x 10^8 dead load and assuming uniform density. (So help me, Bob, if you mouth off about this assumption, I will go on AT LENGTH about why it is a reasonable assumption given the calculation and what can be inferred by its result.) This gives a total GPE of 9.47 x 10^11 J. This number is in good agreement with the value Robert gave of 3.98 x 10^11 J.
450,000,000 kg appears to be the dead load of a tower. At 110 floors that equals 4,090,909 kg per floor. Floor area is 3,636 sq. m.
So that would be a per square foot load = 1,125 kg/m^2 or 230 psf close to both our estimates.
Slarti:
are these the numbers you used? Also did you take each floor’s weight and its corresponding height of fall? Or did you use some sort of average?
Byron,
Thanks. I think my numbers should be acceptable. They may even be low when we consider that we are not just looking for failure, but uniform instantaneous failure.
Robert,
Take your time. I was in the same place yesterday and I had to keep answering posts from you and Bob. Frustrating, isn’t it? 😉
I’ll answer your question when I get finished with my response to Bob.
Robert:
200/212 no real difference, except in this case you put the safety factor on the supporting member.
If you want to put the safety factor on the loads it would be about 310 psf using my number.
There is a little more to it but that is basically it.
Allowable Stress Design (ASD) vs. Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD). Most people use LRFD in this day and time. I imagine ASD was used for the WTC.
But then the design load is not the load in the building at time of collapse, that would have been around 70-100 psf dead load plus the weight of the supporting members and finishes, also dead load.
I hate to leave you guys hanging, but I keep getting interrupted, and now have to run out for about 6 hours. I’ll continue my calculations when I get back, and post them as soon as they are completed.
I do have one very important question for Slarti.
When creating molten steel by transferring energy, does it matter if that energy transfer takes place on the head of a pin (the way you did it) or can I spread out that energy transfer over 500 sq. miles and still have the same effect? Does the rate at which the energy is transferred have anything to do with the equation.
I was getting ready to drop a 70 lb bag of cement on my friends head from 5 ft above him, and was wondering if pouring the contents over 20 minutes would have the same effect.
Byron,
“Maybe around 200 psf for a design load. But that does not include the weight of the structural members.”
You came up with 200 psf design, and I came up with 212 psf design.
Different floors of the WTC were designed to support different loads. Some of the floors were designed to hold equipment. My 212 psf is an average.
Are you objecting to the safety margin?
Robert:
Currently office space is designed for 80 psf for corridors, 50 psf for offices and 20 psf for moveable prtitions.
Add another 50 psf for a 3″ concrete floor.
Maybe around 200 psf for a design load. But that does not include the weight of the structural members.
Bob,
It was a dodge. I asked a question, you refused to answer and tried to change the subject. Like I said, it was a adept one, but it was one none the less.
Someone always has to come up with a theory before you can check to see if it’s falsifiable. That’s why it’s step one. You can’t check a theory that doesn’t exist against anything. Since we have a theory, it’s fairly clear, we’re somewhere between steps two and three. I admit I neglected a “Repeat as necessary” step. Investigation falls into the second step and is entirely appropriate, and I encourage it. If the investigation comes up with something that doesn’t mesh with the current theory, we need to change the current theory (assuming there’s actual facts behind what the investigation says). All I’m saying is that any changes in the theory need to be as vigorously checked against reality as the unaltered theory was.
Slarti,
I’ll show my numbers. When I’m finished you can change the number from 76 to 109 if you wish. The energy required to break 76 floors loose in .38 seconds is much less than it would take to do the same thing to 109 floors.
Byron,
I provided you with the numbers I am using. If you want to offer a number other than 1716 kg/m^2, I’ll wait for you to present your number.
I think there has been sufficient evidence presented to justify heat from multiple sources. Why is thermite so special?
BobEsq:
why does thermite necessarily need to be the reason for heat at the site?
Robert:
the numbers I gave you are for the material. The load is code prescribed. You take the safety factor on the material so if you need 10 lbs of steel to support 100 pounds of load you increase the steel weight by about 1.5-1.67 so you use say a 15 lb beam to support the 100 lbs.
Or saying it another way, if your section modulus needs to be 10 in^3 to support a 100 lb load you would bump it up to 15 or 16 in^3.
Robert,
At the beginning of the collapse all floors were intact (mod plane damage – neglect this). 13s later no floors were intact. Free fall takes 9.18s. Therefore 110 floors were broken loose in 3.78s.
Slarti,
“Under those assumptions you have 200 GJ to play with (45 metric tons of TNT). Be careful. Just as a side note, since gravity is the energy source for breaking floors loose in CD, if your estimate comes in too high you will have proved that CD is impossible – now that’s a conspiracy!”
Spare us your TNT reference. Are you a scientist or a salesman?
Yes! Gravity does all of the final work in a controlled demolition, but only after the major supports that have been fighting against the forces of gravity for years have been removed.
“Actually, you are assuming 13s for the collapse of the entire building – all of the floors are broken loose in that period of time – use the whole building (otherwise you are implying that the 78th-110th floors remained intact.”
To do so would be forensically dishonest. Video evidence clearly establishes that the collapse started just below the point of impact by the planes. We have no video evidence to support collapse of the upper section before it made contact with the ground. To add it to the equation would require me to lessen the time required to break the floor free. i.e. If I break 76 floors free in 3 seconds, it must require more energy to break 109 floors free in the same amount of time.
Robert,
I should mention that I support your attempting this calculation – my tongue is firmly in my cheek on any gibes and I’ll provide any info you ask for if I know it.
Robert,
Actually, you are assuming 13s for the collapse of the entire building – all of the floors are broken loose in that period of time – use the whole building (otherwise you are implying that the 78th-110th floors remained intact.
Robert,
Under those assumptions you have 200 GJ to play with (45 metric tons of TNT). Be careful. Just as a side note, since gravity is the energy source for breaking floors loose in CD, if your estimate comes in too high you will have proved that CD is impossible – now that’s a conspiracy!
Most of the top section of the building did not collapse on itself until it hit the ground. I’ll leave it out and start the collapse at the 77th floor.
Any objections?