Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite Get Embed HTML Code View Article Stats
64 comments

View Ratings | Rate It

Extra ENERGY in 9/11 buildings: Tell the Teacher

By (about the author)     Permalink

opednews.com

High school teacher-level Physics calculations show Gravity ACTION on 9/11 Towers was 0.1 KiloTons of TNT-equivalent ENERGY, and then debris and dust erupted over 8.5 KiloTons of 'TNT' ENERGY in REACTION. No spin, FACT: 0.1 KT ACTION not equal 8.5 KT REACTION Who dunnit?

::::::::

When the top chunk of Mt. St. Helens turned into a cloud of dust, thrown on the landscape, then TV and newspapers said the mountain expended the energy equivalent of 30,000 K Tons of TNT, (a Kilo Ton, or 'KT,' is 1000 tons, and TNT is energetic 'dynamite' force). I talked with the editor of the local newspaper recently, and he remembered publishing such a number back then.

How did they know that number? Were there conflicting opinions? Did TV and newspapers give 'equal time' for disagreement -- back then, May 18, 1980, the Fairness Doctrine still regulated broadcasting to air all sides, or arguable points of view, of any debateable issue -- was it 40,000 KT of TNT equivalent energy? Or 10,000 KT?

No, that's just silly talk. Certainly it was 30,000 KT, no argument, no debate. The number is not an 'opinion,' it's a calculation of a fact. Like an Example problem, perhaps in Physics homework. Multiply the massive weight of the rock times how far it flew against gravity's energy forcing it down to the ground; and so, weight times distance times gravity, is the energy number ... presto, the math is done, easy as pie.

The same calculation makes a fact that 8.5 KT of energy force expanded the dust cloud of pulverized concrete which came out of each Twin Tower on 9/11 and spread across Manhattan's buildings and streets an inch thick, or more.

Eight-point-five Kilo Tons, or 8.5 KT of expended energy, is the number which TV and newspapers do NOT say, because it's censored, prohibited, since there's a mystery about where that energy came from. Since zero-point-one Kilo Tons, or 0.1 KT, is all the energy that gravity had, forcing down on each building.

Gravity smacking the floors together, one-by-one flattening them like pancakes, all told, 110 floors pushed down into a stack on ground level, where gravity can't push any farther -- multiplying all the weight that came down the distance to the ground, and the fact is: 0.1 KT of TNT-equivalent energy was expended. That's all there possibly was. 0.1 KiloTons of TNT-equivalent energy. If a Tower weighed twice as much, there was 0.2 KT of energy in it. If it weighed twice as much being twice as tall, then 0.4 KT of energy was in it, at all times, stored there by the laborious work invested in building it, making it stand about 30 years against gravity pushing it down.


Whether the building is on fire or not, it weighs the same and stands as tall, until gravity -- not fire -- starts into action.

Same as if you have a book on the table, and you push it off the edge so it drops on a weight scale. When it hits the scale, it scores the same (energy) force of gravity pushing its fall, every time, whether or not the book is on fire. Instead of a book, if you use a balloon full of water, the force measured when it falls down on the scale is the same, every time, whether the water is liquid or solid ice. And, if you know how tall the table is, and you know the weight of the book or water balloon, you can calculate the pounds of force the scale is going to show under the falling object -- and have that answer before you push the weight off the table! It's not an "opinion," it's a calculation, in the facts of the matter.

Each 9/11 dust cloud measured 8.5 KT of (energy) force spreading out of the building. But only 0.1 KT of gravity pushed each building, straight down. Such 'Action-NOT equal-Reaction' was as if you dropped a 1 Ton book off the table and the scale measured 85 Tons hit it. The mystery of where the extra energy force came from, measured on 9/11, is an unsolved mystery.

The 9/11 Commission did not solve the mystery. Heck, the 9/11 Commission did not even Report the mystery, of 8.5 KT of TNT energy measured in the dust cloud expanding out of each Tower. Gagged silent Commissioners, like TV and newspapers. Was it only 8 KT, or 5 KT, of energy throwing the dust? The 9/11 Commissioners got paid taxpayer money to do the math, to calculate the Physics homework problem. Then they cashed our check and never did the math calculation. That's public fraud.

Heck, the 9/11 Commission never even reported anything about the third(!) skyscraper, turned into an expanding dust cloud on 9/11, (billowing out of the so-called Building 7 of the World Trade Center), nevermind not calculating the energy spread of Building 7's fall. The 9/11 Commissioners took our money, that our Congress gave them, and turned in a blank homework assignment. Nor did our missing Congress ever ask to see the missing math, either. TV and newspapers are now censored, and prohibited from telling the unsolved mystery number.

TV and newspapers have the factual calculation of the explosive-equivalent energy number, certainly -- the same place they got it from for Mt. St. Helens.

What TV and newspapers don't have, and what Congress doesn't have, and what the American taxpayers who paid for it don't have, is the answer to: What happened on 9/11?

The answer is sure NOT that a plane hit the building, it caught fire, and fell down, just as sure as 1 KT is NOT equal to 85 KT.

The mystery remains unsolved. What happened? And the 9/11 Commissioners committed fraud, which is a crime, cashing the check from Congress but then never producing the goods they were required to deliver on contract.

What happened on 9/11?, when 8.5 KiloTons of (energy) force came out of each Tower where gravity put only 0.1 KiloTons of (energy) force in each heavy tall building ... fire or no fire, because gravity makes buildings fall down, fire is innocent, weighs nothing, doesn't count.. Unless it exploded.

But how could (energetic) explosives get into the three skyscrapers, (particularly Building 7 where FBI and CIA offices were)? Was there a World Trade Center security guard watching? Did building Security keep records? Who owned the building Security Company? Oh, wait, that's not a mystery, that's in the public record of the business: Securacom, and its part-owner, on the board of directors is President Bush's brother, Marvin Bush.

At least, the 9/11 Commissioners can be charged with the crime of contract fraud, and perp-walked into Court, to do the math and answer to a judge. What happened on 9/11? Not crashing airplanes, since the buildings withstood that, (and Building 7 never got hit at all, yet it turned into dust). When we step back from the many non-counting details, shoved in our face for attention -- what floor the plane hit, which floor fell first, who went in to rescue people, how strong were the stairs, when did the fires burn out -- and mindfully look at the Big Picture from the point of view of a helicopter circling the scene, we calculate ALL of the parts ADDED UP in the whole building shebang, gave gravity force 0.1 KT of push-down energy, and we see gravity did it, and then we see recorded measurement shows that more than 85-times-too-much energy erupted a cloud up, in reaction to gravity's Big Push action.

Maybe Political Science can calculate how many more times the force of Law was broken erupting out of the 9/11 Commission pushing fraud on Congress. I can't calculate the political, I can calculate the physical sciences. The fact of the matter is 9/11 physics continues being an unsolved mystery problem.

I asked my friend, the editor, if his newspaper is going to publish the mystery I reported to him. He said 'the Democrats in Congress' should have first reported it to be published, before they got their anthrax letters from the CIA's germ warfare lab, and now he didn't want his newspaper to get an anthrax letter. So America's unsolved mystery goes on, unreported, as TV and newspapers are censored from saying.

What happened on 9/11?

[Answers in the back of the book, as usual, are here at this website: TinyURL.com/2p8kep There, the calculation math is done for all to see and check for errors, including 9/11 Commissioners, and Congress, and TV and newspaper people. That website uses KWH units, or Kilo Watt Hours, like your electric bill, to calculate total 9/11 energies. Gravity Action on each Tower was about 140,000 KWH, and then over 10,000,000 KWH of energy erupted in Reaction. Above, my version calculates in terms of Kilo Tons of TNT-equivalent energy, which uses this translation:
1 KWH = 3.6 Mega Joules, (3,600,000 J.),
1000 KWH = 3.6 Giga Joules, (3,600,000,000 J.)
1 Ton TNT force = 4.185 GigaJoules, (4,185,000,000 J.),
and those two (1000 KWH and 1 Ton TNT) multiplied times 1000 to get to Kilo Tons leads to
1,000,000 KWH = 3600 GigaJ.
1000 Ton TNT = 1 KT = 4185 GigaJ.

So thereby, I took each 1,000,000 KWH in the website calculations, as 6/7 (six sevenths, as 3600 / 4200 GJ) of 1 KT of energy; which results in 10,000,000 KWH = 8.5 KT and 140,000 KWH = 0.120 KT ... and I rounded 0.12 KT down to 0.1 KT, but you can round it up to 0.2 KT, if you prefer, or even 0.5 KT and still have ten times more dust cloud mystery above what energy gravity could possibly put in it.
As far as that goes, the 8.5 KT of energy reaction, (10,000,000 KWH) from each Tower, uses rounded-down measurements, for conservative estimation -- explained at the website: TinyURL.com/2p8kep -- so 8.5 KT is the least of it, and actual 9/11 energy released could possibly be ten times greater, 85 KT of TNT equivalent, or more.

Furthermore, the value cited for Mt. St. Helens being a "30,000 KT" eruption, is the number I recall and I did not look it up in old newspapers. TV and newspapers in 1980, definitely did issue some number, but in the use of it here only to make the point that a calculation CAN number the quantity of energy in a dust cloud, the firgured Mt. St. Helens number is arbitrary. However, my recall usually is accurate in such details, should anyone care to check to verify.]

So no one knows. An unsolved mystery. The airplanes did NOT do it.. Who dunnit? What happened on 9/11?

 

digital programmer turned thought specialist, sorta: rocket surgeon.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this diary has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
64 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

I've never seen this done before. What a great alternative by Robert Hoogenboom on Friday, Jun 27, 2008 at 7:39:55 PM
Bldg 7 Reaction ENERGY release can be calculated by meremark on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:57:27 AM
After more careful reading of your question ... by meremark on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 2:28:52 AM
500 MJ displacement charge for avg. lightning bolt by meremark on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:56:59 AM
"Extra ENERGY in 9/11 buildings: Tell the Teacher" by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 6:42:05 AM
Your head's in the details of the debris. by meremark on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:00:12 AM
How about facts instead of name-calling? by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:38:03 AM
WHY? are you ... even here. by meremark on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:32:30 PM
Why are YOU here? by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:09:09 PM
These questions have been answered before by csnet on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:23:58 PM
Response to: "these questions have been answered before" by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 2:26:16 PM
Response to response by csnet on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 4:17:25 PM
Back atcha by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 7:11:07 PM
Re: Highlighting remarks by csnet on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:18:15 PM
What we agree on by albury smith on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 6:03:23 AM
No loud bangs... by Dave Rogers on Thursday, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:16:38 PM
Email this article to Zdenek Bazant by wraft on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 10:48:19 AM
NIST "Idiots"? by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:48:09 AM
NIST idiots by wraft on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:52:26 PM
re: "NIST idiots" by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 7:50:28 PM
Yes by Pixie on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 8:36:27 PM
Pixie Does NIST by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 10:12:24 PM
I smell desperation ... by Pixie on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 8:15:21 AM
Poor Little Pixie by albury smith on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 9:47:05 AM
Gravity DOES have energy to collapse the building, by meremark on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:05:27 PM
Pyroclastic Flows? by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 12:54:41 PM
What else about Kroger? by wraft on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 4:04:48 PM
Thermite's an "explosive" now? by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:24:22 PM
KISS AND MAKE UP. by Wolfie on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 7:01:46 PM
Short-selling American and United shares by albury smith on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 8:06:54 PM
It's not that easy by Alan Williams on Saturday, Jun 28, 2008 at 11:12:00 PM
My suggestions by albury smith on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 6:18:19 AM
BIased? Oh, yes. by Mark Sashine on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 8:49:52 AM
Biased, too. by albury smith on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 10:03:50 AM
I just asked for by Mark Sashine on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 10:33:08 AM
Due process by albury smith on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:00:15 AM
Nope by Mark Sashine on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:07:55 AM
Yep by albury smith on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 12:09:49 PM
What sort of beast is this? by richard on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 5:53:32 PM
From the "Beast" by albury smith on Monday, Jun 30, 2008 at 7:47:41 AM
Richard, You CARD! by boomerang on Sunday, Jun 29, 2008 at 9:45:24 PM
More name-calling? by albury smith on Monday, Jun 30, 2008 at 7:53:28 AM
Hater baiters could do better than you. Simply ... by meremark on Monday, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:39:33 AM
I thought I was just an "Ostrich" and a "Troll" by albury smith on Monday, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:33:48 PM
evidence of explosives by gravity32 on Monday, Jun 30, 2008 at 8:32:24 PM
Explosives or Thermate? Neither Makes Any Sense. by albury smith on Tuesday, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:51:17 AM
Questionable analysis? by Alan Williams on Tuesday, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:19:49 AM
Some answers to "What Happened"? by Andrew Johnson on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 12:58:37 PM
Judy Wood by albury smith on Friday, Jul 4, 2008 at 9:13:58 AM
well now. by Jimi Hughes on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 1:56:59 PM
Can we please not be silly? by Alan Williams on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:04:41 PM
apparenty you didn't look. by Jimi Hughes on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 4:22:39 PM
Come on by Alan Williams on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 5:48:04 PM
bought and paid for? by Jimi Hughes on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 6:09:46 PM
You're done already, and I'm getting paid? Cool! by Alan Williams on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 6:34:28 PM
links.. by Jimi Hughes on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 6:44:48 PM
I hate thinking up subjects by Alan Williams on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 7:42:40 PM
How did the "airplanes" alter the earth's magnetic field? by CB Brooklyn on Thursday, Jul 3, 2008 at 9:50:57 PM
Making sense by Alan Williams on Friday, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:17:45 PM
to the uneducated... by Jimi Hughes on Tuesday, Jul 8, 2008 at 6:18:14 PM
Checking some math by Rod Fur on Thursday, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:07:35 AM
QUESTION? by Jimi Hughes on Thursday, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:13:41 PM
By The Way... by Jimi Hughes on Thursday, Jul 10, 2008 at 1:16:07 PM
Absurd nonsense by L Harris on Thursday, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:13:53 AM