21-10-2012, 06:55 PM
(This post was last modified: 21-10-2012, 07:24 PM by Albert Doyle.)
Charles Drago Wrote:[
Explain this to me: Given that we're listening to evenly spaced "booms," and that you hypothetically ascribe the spacing to a reasonable-to-expect series of floor collapses, why wouldn't differing floor loads -- a term which this layman uses to refer to varying levels of resistance based upon varying levels of materials on each floor -- create an asymmetrical series of "booms"?
Unlike some who post on this thread, I am eager to learn -- and the first step in the eradication of ignorance is to acknowledge its presence.
If indeed the collapse originated at the truss level that was the place where the uneven loads existed. If the truss collapsed first then the uneven booms would have occurred first. But they didn't. They occurred on the oscilloscope at the end. Or perhaps they did? Because the oscilloscope showed two booms first and a space followed by other even booms. The uneven booms occurred right in sequence with the acceleration of the collapse right where they should be.
According to Galileo, the weight of the floors should make no difference because objects fall at the same speed. However different loads could have a minor local effect in the collapse, though probably a negligible one when compared to the overall stresses and failure. What's most telling here is the uneven booms the video makers omitted from their analysis. Since they happened at the end they conform to an acceleration of the collapse as the building gained inertia. The audio fingerprint of exactly what you would expect to see.
.