It’s not in any way a direct comparison, but I’ll go along.

Yes, in your example the first floor would probably be crushed. Also, the third floor would probably exhibit considerable damage. Damage (distortion) would diminish rapidly from this point, though it’s possible that the tower would actually topple over.

I chose this for the soundtrack; other videos are available:

No need to be a dick, maxtorque. And I didn’t say that anything was blown up by the US Government; Congress would never allow it Shirley.

It is important only to invoke science if you understand it.

You can say that again.

you could if you used thirty ton tea bags

Precisely!!! I’d need a thirty ton tea bag to stand any chance of hammering in a nail. Why?

it really is pointless I have more chance of persuading the pope there is no god as his belief is more rational than this guff

Indeed; but would it require a controlled explosion to make 000s of unconnected blocks collapse into a pile? Would the same thing happen if all the blocks were glued to their adjacent blocks?

If we took the top glass from a stack of pint glasss and dropped it back in from, say, 50cm*, will it a) fall to earth, breaking all the other glasses before breaking itself, or b) break some glasses and possibly itself before coming to a halt? If we took a steel-framed tower construction, damaged fewer than 20% of supporting columns across less than 5% of its height, would you expect the portion above the damage to fall symmetrically vertical and destroy the entire structure below it before then destroying itself?

*relatively, way further than the tops of the towers descended

Is the pyramid above a controlled explosion as well?

Does it look like a controlled explosion? Would it require a controlled explosion to make 000s of unconnected blocks collapse into a pile? Would the same thing happen if all the blocks were glued to their adjacent blocks?

The structure below was not strong enough to withstand the force necessary to decelerate falling part above

You mean the lower structure was unable to provide any resistance? None at all? And yet the upper part was strong enough to withstand (resist) the force that destroyed the (structurally identical) lower part?

lets get it moving by say 1/2m the gap it fall through when it started to fall.
PEi=mgh
Potential energy (i means intial, lets make that zero)
=0.16x450000000x9.8×0.5 =352million joules. That much energy to give up in the first half metre..

it is not relatively small its 16% of the total mass below it, and it only needs to destroy one floor below it ie 1%, the mass is now 1% bigger and still accelerating. By a few more meters. Every floor it increases mass and is going faster.
Plug in the original mass, having now moved a single floor (2 metres) and its 4 times as much energy as we had in the beginning..

You’re overlooking the unavoidable resistance that the lower, undamaged portion of the structure provides. There must be a deceleration as each new layer is reached, no matter what the condition of that layer is. The Law of Conservation of Momentum states that the total momentum of a closed system – which is what each tower (and WTC7) were – does not change. So, whatever the momentum of the upper 15% ( for arguments sake) the momentum of the lower 85% is 0 (zero); therefore unless additional energy is introduced to accelerate the upper portion, which is essentially what it is being claimed the upper portion did, Newton’s Third Law dictates that any damage (distortion) that occurs to the lower portion as a result of the impact of the upper portion will also occur in the upper portion. Kinetic energy is absorbed by both portions until they gradually (a relative term) come to a halt after roughly the equivalent mass of the upper portion has been distorted in the the lower portion. For all intents and purposes, the structure of the upper portion and the lower portion are identical, so the example is even easier to consider than if the upper portion had a greater mass, in which case it might have travelled further into the lower portion before coming to a halt. It’s remarkably easy to test and observe for ones self – go and drop a breeze block onto a breeze block, snowball onto snowball, or pumpkin ont pumpkin – whatever you like and however many times you do it, I guarantee that at no point will the dropped object accelerate through the static object beyond its equivalent mass.

It’s fundamental, foundation physics. Uncomfortable, I know, but physics says that all three buildings were demolished. I’ve absolutely no idea by whom, though looking at who profited (considerably) might shed some light.

My understanding is that the “freefall speed” adherents expected it to fall much much slower, and to kind of klunk at every level, whereas it fell more or less in the amount of time it would take a single object to fall. Any pauses were microscopically short because the kinetic energy was massive compared to the energy devoted to the work of destroying the material below.

So, using only the assistance of gravity, 15-20% of each tower was able to pulverise, obliterate the undamaged remaining 80-85%? A small, relatively fragile object was able to almost totally ignore the resistance of an enormous, rigid object and make it to earth before falling apart itself? Or it fell apart on the way down but still remained compact enough to effectively retain its mass, allowing it to continue smashing through the intact structure below without resistance? Why do I not use tea bags to hammer in nails?

I knew an Indonesian woman who came to work in Newcastle. She was very interested in the city and in seeing new places, but had a dubious sense of direction and orientation. Whenever I told her about shops/cafés/etc I always had to give directions from Primark on Northumberland St.

That upper mass fell because the fires below it weakened the steel structure to the point where it no longer had the capability to support it. Once it began to descend there was no stopping it as the structure was designed for a static load not a dynamic one.

The upper mass (supposedly) fell onto the lower mass because the supporting structure failed. Please explain how you believe it managed to overcome NTL and LMC and continue beyond its own equivalent mass and continue at the same rate of descent through the rest of the structure.

Because the top of the building did collapse first, then the weight and impact of the top part of the building falling down over stressed the lower part which then collapsed.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Nobody has yet disproved Newton’s Third Law. NIST/The 911 Commission stated that one tower was demolished in 9 seconds, the other in 11. From where did the tops of each tower obtain sufficient potential energy to seemingly overcome NTL, and the Law of Momentum Conservation, continuing to the ground at an virtually constant rate and not just come to a stop after crushing the equivalent of its own mass?

It’ll be jammed and you’ll probably wait 30-40 minutes for your meal, but it will be delicious. Not fish and chips, though I suspect OP knows that.

I doubt this thread will have a happy ending…

I’m not looking to ape or mimic anyone’s personal style, rather I’m looking for confirmation that there’s a validity in persuing this slightly personal interest,

It’s really as valid as it is to you, and the desire is there to explore a theme; therefore it is valid. Get out there and explore!

Just get on the bus outside. Straight into the city and connects easily with the S-Bahn. There might even be a train station, but either way, it’s Berlin – public transport is excellent.

it’s been quite a study of mine for a few years, so a lot of stuff from rural Ireland and a bit from England, only some is published. Some landscape stuff, mostly this sort of thing:

PM if you’re interested and care to give a bit more info on what it’s for.

It’s nothing racist as such just paying out the spammer

Oh, not racist ‘as such’. So just a little bit, slightly, sort of racist; the OK sort, because the person doesn’t really matter anyway? I get it; thanks Mike.

I’d say fake. The silver bolts look unrefined; but the real giveaway would be the feet, which are too basic and cheap looking. I’d expect Vitra/Eames to use two-piece thread-in feet that come on their other chairs, probably with a felt pad too. Those generic screwed-on plastic things look terrible. Also, it would be stamped Vitra and Eames somewhere on the seat. You should have been paying around £350 for that chair new, however that translates to your currency.

As an aside: I’m rather disappointed by the less-than-veiled prejudice/racism on this thread.

That must be some real high-brow humour up there if it went over the OP’s head. Can’t believe you dullards figures it out so quick, and without a helpful YouTube video about your neuroticsness!

I’d expect the lens is the 18-55 kit lens. It’s not a great lens – the AF is slow, the manual focus ring is tiny and vague, and there’s quite a bit of distortion in the glass; however! It’s just fine for getting going and learning how to use the SLR body. I’m from the school of learning with a fixed/prime lens – I believe it makes one think more about composition and helps to connect the photographer with the world they’re capturing – so I’d think about looking for a used 35mm or 50mm lens to replace the kit lens.

Give them something to create? Paints, Play-doh…

Perhaps it was a not-so-subtle-yet-far-too-subtle commentary/observation/protest from a youth who have been left an unnecessary mess to resolve by a generation of wasters who have failed to make wise and prudent use of their resources? A generation who assume mindlessness because that is all they know themselves.

No work for me.

Greg, how do you position yourself when interacting with people of a superior intellect to you? From the outset though, how do you identify that somebody has a superior intellect? What are your criteria?

(Please read this with the tone of genuine curiosity that motivates it)

But the one thing I am not Ransos, is intellectually challenged.

You’re in the 85 percentile? That’s “above average”, don’t get carried away.

So your issue with me is stylistic rather than factual?

It’s both, you wooden-headed sod, though don’t confuse the facts you think you have with how you reason with them. And don’t be so proud of your refusal, or should I say inability, to suspend your own beliefs.

I’m going to cut to the chase here and give a view into a blind spot. Greg, you come across as somebody who considers themselves above others, and you’re pompous and verbose with it. You confuse the forefront of your own experience/knowledge as being the forefront of everyone else’s, which is more than a little naive and more than a little offensive and disrespectful. That is why your demand that other people get with the program and join you at the front with your five personality traits rubs people up the wrong way. You disagree, of course, but until you learn some humility you’re going to struggle to engage with people and the numerous positive aspects of your input will be lost like tears in the rain.

Not liking them is fair enough, different strokes for different folks; but they’re a very talented bunch of songwriters and musicians, virtually peerless, who played a soundtrack to the lives of millions. Ten and Vs are epic works, then they really grew up between Vitalogy and Binaural. It all sounds a little muted since then, in my opinion, but they’ve still come up with some great tracks. Live, they’re just fantastic. They made at least seven superb studio albums with a huge diversity of tone and tempo – how many bands have managed that? How many bands have managed half of that? Like I said: taste is taste; but you sound like a nob when you pour scorn on Pearl Jam.

For that money I’d get this:

http://www.axminster.co.uk/festool-cxs-li-2-6-cordless-drill-driver-set-10-8v-2-6ah-506745

(Or the TXS with the ‘nornal’ pistol grip) The tool/head attachments make changing between drill and screwdriver much simpler and the 90deg head is a real boon. It’ll charge fast, last ages, and at the end of a day of use you’ll be very, very grateful you didn’t get a big fat Makita – the Festool is light, well balanced and the tool tip sits perfectly I front of your hand grip, so there’s no adjusting pressure to get the right balance for drilling/screwing pressure.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/so-what-is-neuroticism-and-agreeableness-industriousness-etc

What does he say about over-dependence on external validation?

Not really pedantry, rather something genuinely interesting; but even a healthy tree is around 99% dead.

World’s first FaceTime call?

There’s little strength in mitres (where it’s end-grain on end- grain) unless you incorporate mortise/tenons, and that thing is all about coping with the racking stresses. Biscuits aren’t a suitable reinforcement on a joint in that position. I’d probably go with through mortise/tenon, possibly even wedged, with mitred shoulders on the four outer corners.

Cherry would be beautiful.

Illustrator Draw is free for iPad; Procreate is relatively cheap, even moreso is Autodesk. Also look at iFontMaker. Illustrator CS6 (will work fine on an 09 Pro) can be had for nothing for the MacBook if she knows somebody who might know somebody. You might know somebody? Don’t think I’d like a tablet to be my only tool, but i could definitely get by for a bit.

Who’s Mike?

That happens on my iPad Pro too, it’s a bit irritating. Open the app and it’s showing a random email in the main view panel, or no email, and it’s scrolled down the email list and not necessarily to the same email as shown in the viewer. I wondered if it happened when I deleted mail on my phone (also iOS) or laptop (OS X) and the iPad didn’t clean up properly after syncing.
It happens only occasionally, so I’ve forgotten to test the idea.

You guys know that the dogs’ faces aren’t what is drawn; right? They’re photographs with either a border (pardon the pun) drawn/blended around or cropped out with a different background.

What do you enjoy doing? Help us out…

I got a pair of Soundmagic after a recommendation on a previous thread here. The sound isn’t quite as full or detailed as my Sennheiser CX 5.00s, but it’s still excellent for the money. Build quality is superb and if you can’t get them to fit your ears with any of the dozen or so buds provided then you have weird ears*

*my apologies if you do have weird ears and already know it