The Pentagon recently released more photos taken in the aftermath of the 9/11 plane crash. They do not clear the doubts of many on the dynamics of the crash against the Pentagon. Nor, as a news item, they displaced – in the combine that conjoins Congress, Senate and the ”free-press” – the current overwhelming interest in Russia’s role in the 2016 US presidential elections. An interest acting as a trigger for a slew of anti-Russian declarations by sundry governmental and military bigwigs.
It takes an unimaginable lack of any sense of humor, to think or believe that the American electorate at large may have the capacity, let alone the willingness to be seduced by foreign propaganda (Russian or otherwise). Some critics accuse the masses of ignorance, which is incorrect. The charge, if any, should be of utter un-interest in anything non-American. An attitude with deep roots – for something non-American is unconsciously and lexically close to something ‘un-American’ – hence suspicious when not contemptible.
To wit, and assuming the polls by The Washington Post believable, only one in six Americans can find Ukraine on the map. And the majority who think that Russia invaded Ukraine are those who cannot find Ukraine on the map.
Still, a “free-press” journal that tells the truth is like a dog that speaks, very rare. And a “free-press” journalist who goes against the line of mendacity imposed by his employer, is like a dog that speaks Norwegian, even rarer.
But I digress. The volume of written and audio-visual material on 9/11 is immense. I will not, therefore, propose new additions, thus running the risk that “… this news, which is called true, is so like an old tale, that the verity of it is in strong suspicion.”
Nevertheless, I recently found a short, interesting and instructive related video. Instructive because it shows incontrovertibly, using simple physics, why the collapse of WT1 and WT2 (let alone WT7) were controlled demolitions. Interesting because it indirectly suggests why it took so long for the evidence, though available immediately, to be publicized. The video in question was produced in 2012.
As readers may recall, the US Congress appointed the august NIST (National Institute of Science and Technology) to compile a “detailed report” on the 9/11 collapse of the World Towers.
Far from us to obstruct the veneration which learning procures. It took years to produce the report (thousands of pages printed, millions of dollars spent), and it has proven perhaps the most pointless book since the book “How to Learn French” has been translated into French. The NIST’s report is a massive monument of printed paper. It gives little or no credible explanations and none who has it not, will perceive himself to want.
The first glitch in which, occurred during the official presentation by the titled president of NIST, Prof. Shyam Sunder. When a less academically conspicuous but clever High School physics instructor, David Chandler, showed the results of his research.
Using the video of the collapse of WT7, Chandler marked on the screen various points during the building-collapse and measured the time when the top of the falling building reached each marked point. The incontrovertible conclusion was that – for all intents and purposes – the building had fallen with the acceleration of gravity, which is the visual signature of a classical controlled demolition.
Caught on the spot, Prof. Sunder gave an interesting reply, “Gravity – he said – is the force that controls the universe.” We would be hard pressed to dispute with Shyam Sunder the palm of genius or science.
David Chandler aptly commented that, “It is a reply I would expect from one of my students, who did not even open the book to study the lesson.”
Still, the discrepancy was so great, that a few months later, NIST modified the report and conceded that “some of the fall” had occurred at the acceleration of gravity. But they added 2.5 seconds to the total time of fall, which allowed them to adhere to their false explanations. Or, in more familiar terms, allowed them to cover their ass.
But the collapse of Towers 1 and 2 was less obvious. Here Newton’s law allows a simple and clear explanation that excludes and makes unnecessary the myriad of other plausible, implausible, esoteric or otherwise imaginative theories.
Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. In the instance, two forces were at play. One was the potential energy of the upper part of the towers (above the impact point of the planes), energy that converted from potential to kinetic during the fall of the buildings. The other was the absorbing capacity or the resisting energy offered by the lower part of the towers (below the impact point of the planes.)
In more mundane terms, the weight of the upper portion of each tower would have been counteracted by the much heavier (therefore resistant) lower portion. The result should have been a symmetric compression of the upper and lower structures at the point of impact – or, possibly a lateral fall of the upper portion, allowing for the lesser resistance of the structure-section at the point where the planes struck the building(s). Even without watching the video, the transformation of moving (kinetic) energy into deformation and contraction is what happens during the frontal collision of two moving cars. The kinetic energy released (by the moving cars), is consumed in their deformation.
Calculating the potential energy (the weight) of the upper portion of the Twin Towers is not an impossible task – yet the NIST report makes no reference to it. Nor, apparently, NIST has replied to questions by the very qualified engineers who posed them.
But even assuming that the upper portion of the towers had sufficient energy to destroy the rest of the buildings, it could not have occurred at the actual verified speed, which was the speed of near free-fall. Doing so would violate Newton’s Law of Momentum Conservation, which states than in an isolated system (here the upper and lower portion of the towers), the total energy must remain the same.
Again, visualizing the front collision of two cars, the energy of the moving cars is transformed into their individual deformations. But, as the collision occurs, the speed decreases quickly, until all the kinetic energy of each car is converted into a mechanical deformation. No new energy is added to the system.
As per the video, the upper portion of the tower is represented both in its original position and separately hanging from a hypothetical crane. If they were simultaneously released, which one would reach the ground first? The one hanging from the crane, of course, for it would accelerate and fall at free-fall speed. Whereas the speed of the upper portion still in its original position would be reduced by the resistance offered by the lower intact portion – in accordance with the Law of Momentum Conservation.
Instead, and here is the crux, the complex of the upper and lower towers fell at essentially near free-fall speed, which is what occurs in controlled demolitions, as verifiable directly or via multiple videos easily found on the web.
Stated in another way, in a controlled demolition, the energy at play is the total potential energy of the whole building, not merely the potential energy of the top. The utilization of the total potential energy is achieved by carefully positioning the explosive charges at the base of the structure to be demolished. Otherwise, nothing would prevent the demolishers from placing the dynamite charges anywhere they like along the height of the building, and obtaining the same result.
In the case of the twin towers it is as if the path of the falling upper portions had been completely cleared out and could offer no resistance. It took each tower from 10 to 12 seconds to fall to the ground. An absolute free-fall time would have been 9.2 seconds.
To these topic and crucial questions posed by very qualified engineers, NIST has replied with the eloquence of silence. Wonder at the silence may be allayed by remembering NIST’s director’s answer (above) at David Chandler’s observation on the fall of WT7.
The “Newtonian” explanation of 9/11 is elegant and relatively simple. Why did it not surface immediately when the event took place? Here the theory must be speculative, though not conspiratorial.
Fire has an overwhelming effect on the imagination. In an Olympian duel between Vulcan, the God of fire and the River God Scamander, protector of Troy, Homer makes fire the winner. We even have the expression, “to fire the imagination.”
Those huge balls of fire, after the planes crashed, overwhelmed the imagination, giving the event the color of science fiction, where everything is possible, even the cancellation or interruption of the laws of physics.
That the temperature of burning jet-fuel is well below that required to melt steel, did not carry any emotional or explanatory weight, even with those who had an interest in the physics of the event, independently from what was propounded by the free press. Quite apart from the thousands of victims and the harrowing images of those who chose to die in a fall than in a fire.
The free press has been silent for years on the plight of the victims’ families, who have requested another investigation. It is the same press that, from the beginning, defined “conspiracy theorists,” or more contemptibly “truthers,” all those who have questioned the official line – even Newton, as we can easily deduct.
Those who have attentively considered the history of mankind, know that every age has its peculiar character. In the age of 9/11, as in many other subsequent instances, the free press has long adopted the unspoken tenet whereby nonsense makes sense and lies become true by repetition.
Considering that 9/11, the “new Pearl Harbor,” has been the justification for the slaughter of millions, the destruction of entire countries, the assassination of two head of states, the attempt at the life of another (Assad), the creation of ISIS, of terror and the migrant millions, the position of the free press is beyond contempt. Considering also that even Trump, at the time of the event, stated that it was impossible for the towers to fall as they did.
It is equally a sign of our times that all of us outside the “Kabbala” can only hope that the immeasurable evil of 9/11 and its aftermath may “press on the memory of the malefactors / Like damned guilty deeds to sinners’ minds.”
Graphics, cartoon, courtesy of Vincenzo Apicella