what to make of "conspiracy theories"?

Les Schaffer schaffer at optonline.net
Tue Feb 12 13:14:49 MST 2002

At 09:06 AM 2/12/02 -0500, you wrote:
>In addition, the main designer of the WTC made clear in a speech given
>before Sept. 11 that it was designed to survive an impact from a Boeing 707

it did survive the initial impact. when they spoke of "survive" they meant
you couldnt topple the towers via a sideways blow. they didnt consider fire
weakening the joist system with consequent loss of stability.

>Designing a skyscraper the size of the WTC without taking into account the
>possibility of an air collision is like designing a skyscraper in San
>Francisco or Los Angeles and not taking into account the earthquakes.

capitalists count $$$$ very carefully.

>As for high-temperature creep, we are talking about structural steel, which
>does not hold heat very well.

do you know what high-temperature creep means??? that's why i asked about
your training.

also, there is loss of strength with increase of T in steels. see any
strength of materials text.

>It likes to spread it out as far as it can go;
>one person likened it to trying to "stack syrup on a plate".

"spread" doesn't imply low temperatures in and of itself, only more
uniformly distributed.

>  Besides that,
>what accounts for the massive time differential between when the planes hit
>and when the towers toppled? About 30 minutes for one, and 108 minutes (!!!)
>for the other.

time-dependent heat transfer + time-dependent strength reduction =

notice too that the __second__ tower to be struck fell before the first.
now why on earth would that be???

well, second tower struck was hit LOWER than the first, hence buckling
loads (more mass above imminent failure point) were higher and hence for
the time dependent problem failure was achieved first in South Tower.

>If it was just the failure of the floor supports, the whole
>building would not have collapsed ... and it would have been relatively
>quickly, when the fire was producing the most heat.

you understand the concept of structural stability, yes or no???

>I only want the truth, not excuses and not conspiracies. I think those
>affected deserve that much.


whats your theory, anyway???

les schaffer

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list