Yeah. I guess things work a lot differently here. We have two series of tests. The HSPAs (High School Proficiency Assessment) are taken Junior year. Those determine whether or not you graduate High School.
Senior year (and Junior) you take the SAT tests, which are pretty much used only to get you into a good college. I don't think they mean any more than that. Better SATs mean you can get into a better college. When you apply to colleges, one of the major decision makers is where your SAT scores lie in relation to the average scores of people who were accepted the year previously.
Other than that, that's all we have. Maybe SAT scores are something you can put on your resume, but I really doubt it. So it basically is either pass or fail.
I'm a freshman in college, so I don't know what else might come my way in terms of major tests or the like, but that's all I've been through so far.
I am curious. What is the equivalent of the CGSE stateside?
I hate this stuff because usually, the only way I am ever able to solve that kind of infection is by reformatting. 
Hopefully someone on this forum can offer you better advice, though.
Hopefully someone on this forum can offer you better advice, though.
Well, if we're talking about the possibility of just the column slowing down the falling mass of 20 stories worth of building, then you have to remember that the column is relatively small. If ANYTHING, it would likely just punch a hole through the structure, instead of slowing it down. I'll continue with the analogies by comparing it to dropping a loaf of bread onto a skewer
I do not know for certain why the center collapsed. I offered my opinion on the matter in post #333 above.
Remember also that if you look at the video, the outer support structure peels away from the structure as it collapses. So it's possible that the floors below started falling even before they were hit. At the least, the floors had VERY LITTLE SUPPORT to begin with, since they are supported from the top.
Yeah. You'll notice I removed that after I posted it. I'd assumed he'd be British as most of you are, but I realized he wasn't. That's good because I really, TRULY believe that the British are much more intelligent than us Americans
EDIT: Ah - I see you've edited your post too!
Did you at ALL read my post right before yours?
EDIT: Ah - I see you've edited your post too!
Did you at ALL read my post right before yours?
Ok, maybe I'm not being clear. The upper mass did not HIT the lower mass all at once. It hit ONE FLOOR AT A TIME. Does my analogy make sense now?
Everyone seems to be stuck on the basic 1/3 into 2/3s thing, but it's more like 1/3 into 1/50 into 1/50 into 1/50 etc...
I give up. I really do. I was trying to make the point that it's something HEAVY falling on something LIGHT. I've shown this last page to three of my friends, and they've all laughed at you. So either everyone here at Virginia Tech is an idiot... or it's just you.
*sigh*
Nevermind. You people amaze me.
I have my exams next week.
Expect to see me online though
Expect to see me online though
What you fail to realize is that even at a VERY low speed, the inertia and momentum of the object is GREATLY increased. A styrofoam board that can support the weight of a bowling ball at rest will have a great deal of difficulty stopping one moving even at a low speed. Also, much in the way styrofoam would either hold it up or snap with very little resistance, the same applies for the building structure. Either the floor can support the falling mass, or the bolts and steel simply snap with little resistance.
Drop a bowling ball through 100 boards of styrofoam and I'm fairly certain that it won't take much longer than a bowling ball falling through the air. A hair longer maybe, but not much.
The central core had surely been damaged as a result of the impact. Not nearly all the way down, but likely at least 10 floors. By the time the collapsingbuilding reached the part of the central support that was still intact, there was now 1/4 to 1/3 of the building falling down. This would surely hav crushed a decent portion of the central colums. Additionally, as the floors collapsed, the trusses (which were anchored to teh central tower) were twisted and pulled out (cough, lateral force, cough) and likely weakened the center even farther. and lastly, neither collapsing part of the building fell in a perfectly vertically fashion, so as it came down, it came straignt down at a slight angle.
\
|
|
|
|
|
|
The top therefore exerted significant lateral force as if fell down - which could possibly explain how it pulverized the central tower. It pushed it to the side as it fell - so the center simply crumbled.
That's my theory anyway.
The building was not air-tight, and the building did have reinforced glass, but the pressure generated by the falling structure was more than strong enough to blow out all the windows way ahead of the debris line. Look at the movie Titanic. As the rear end of the ship sinks vertically, all the tiny portholes (reinforced against the raging ocean) are blown open. You underestimate the amount of pressure than can be built up in this sort of a situation.
Odds are that when a 110 story building collapses, at least one of the 4892273523 steel beams will be split in a funny way. I'll bet if you looked hard enough, you could have found a bunch of steel beams piled in a way so as to look like the charred remains of an alien spacecraft. Does that mean the building was taken down by a cloaked alien ship with a faulty navigational unit?
What part of '110 story high skyscraper' translates to 'very light structure?'
No argument there
Don't even bother trying to make that point. I've pointed it out many times but people seem to want to ignore it...
I must say that while there are a lot of clueless people on this thread, and that sometimes it is extremely frustrating when they refuse to accept something that is simply a scientific fact, this thread is very amusing and fun to argue on.
But that is scientific proof! You could take an identical aircraft, fly it at 500 mph at 1000 feet at full throttle, and then nose down and hit the ground at 550 at a 40 degree angle. The test doesn't need to be recreated. Try it for yourself in a flight simulator if you must. The proof is in the statistical figures of the aircraft.
I would also like to know more about the exact trajectory of the flight, I'm just pointing out that the crash was not something that required a very high altitude, or very strange flightpath to cause it.
Uhmmm - you don't have to clear it up. There's nothing to be proven. The top speed of a 757 is more than 600 mph, and the cruising speed is 500. It's clearly well within the aircraft's abilities to crash into the ground at that speed without gravitational aid.
You obviously don't know much about flying an airplane. You wouldn't have to be more than 1,000 feet in the air to achieve this kind of impact. 550 mph can be reached in level flight using full throttle.
It was DESIGNED to withstand the subsequent fire, but unfortunately it was NOT built that way. They wanted to save money, and one of the ways was to not apply fireproofing in the way the designers had intended. So when you say they were DESIGNED to withstand the impact and fire, you are absolutely correct.
My Subaru was DESIGNED to protect the front passenger in the event of a head on collision with an airbag. We originally bought it two years used, and one of the things we've always wondered is whether or not the airbag canister is actually THERE, because the soft padding on the dash is slightly bulged up as if someone pried open the cover over the air bag and stole it. They're worth $1,000. So, sure, the car might be DESIGNED to protect the passenger, but if a collision happens now, it is likely that the passenger will suffer more injuries than Subaru would have expected. Does that make sense?
Last edited by Stang70Fastback, .
Two aircraft took out two skyscrapers. I've very tempted to say that the resulting collapse was the reason for 7 falling down later, but since I don't know much about that building/story/conspiracy I'll just leave it at:
2 aircraft took out two buildings and maybe a third.
The visible universe is 28 billion light years wide but only 14 billion years old. How is it then that the microwave background radiation throughout the entire universe is the same temperature? Radiation can only travel at the speed of light, so surely it cannot have leveled out yet...
...does that mean that the universe doesn't exist? No. It means that there are still some things that we can't explain. I guess you COULD argue that the universe therefore cannot exist, but there are so many other reasons to believe that it DOES exist that it's far more likely that it's just due to a phenomena that has not yet been uncovered. That's all.
Perhaps, in the ENTIRE 110 stories of the WTC, there were two chemicals that, when combined, form an uber-dark-matter-energy-envelope that can sustain heat for years. Who knows?
For the ****ing bajillionth time, the jet fuel only melted TWO FLOORS WORTH of material. That's all it needed to do to bring the building down.
Look at the video and you will see that the pillars are actually peeled off the building as it collapsed. Giant 20-story-high sections. I'd assume they didn't stay intact because they fell away from the building and hit other buildings. It's not that hard to see how the outcome turned out as it did. I think you're just too wrapped up in your necessity to explain it with an alternate theory that you don't want to accept that.
Another thing I'd like to bring up: People talk about how oddly these buildings collapsed, but you have to realize that this is the first time that structures built in this way and this big ever collapsed (controlled demo or not.) This means that you cannot compare these to other building collapses. There are always instances of scientists discovering new things. They collide a small molecule and it explodes. They predict that a bigger molecule will produce a bigger explosion but then when they try it, it creates a black hole instead, and they have to go back and re-evaluate and determine why the result was different than expected.
And please, by all means, explain how nuclear charges were used.
Last edited by Stang70Fastback, .
Well, I don't know. But I will point out that that debris fell from the sky - at likely not more than 200 MPH. This plane went INTO the Pentagon at 300+ meaning MOST of the debris was IN the building.
I don't see any wreckage, but tbh, I wouldn't expect much of the plane to come back onto the lawn after hitting the building at 300 mph. Besides, those shots cover a very small portion of the lawn.
Oh, and by the way, the lawn was covered in sand/dirt not to cover anything up, but to allow heavy trucks and machinery to access the building without getting stuck in the grass/soft dirt.
Oh, and by the way, the lawn was covered in sand/dirt not to cover anything up, but to allow heavy trucks and machinery to access the building without getting stuck in the grass/soft dirt.
I honestly, truly would like to see someone like Bill Gates fund the building of a full-scale model of one of the pentagon's sides and then actually crash a real plane into it and see what happens.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG