pacifism for true Jesus' followers.
- Thread starter meshak
- Start date
Rosenritter
New member
Is there any way to calculate how long it would take a building to collapse in that fashion, with weight collapsing onto each floor, by floor, by floor?
Rosenritter
New member
By any chance, did you see the video?
Aimiel
Well-known member
:idunno:
Rosenritter
New member
OK, how about a simpler version of that questions. In Earth gravity a free-falling object accelerates at 9.8 m/s^2, meaning that it is possible to calculate how much time it will take any solid object (not counting parachutes, floating feathers, and the like) from a given height. This is true regardless of the mass of the object. A brick will fall just as fast as a marble or a bowling ball or an elephant.
So, how long will it take a building to collapse with its weight falling through each floor, and breaking the new floor in turn? Less time than free fall? Just as much time as free fall? Or will it take more time (slow down the fall) if it has to break through hundreds of floors, each one in turn?
Rosenritter
New member
a) Falling through a hundred different layers of concrete makes the object reach the ground in less time than free fall?
b) Falling through a hundred different layers of concrete makes no difference to the total time of the fall?
c) Falling through a hundred different layers of concrete makes the object reach the ground in more time than free fall?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
what point on the building?
the environment and stresses are different for the 2nd floor as compared to the 104th floor
not every floor fell "through" the one below it
it will fall at a rate lower (smaller, lesser?) than free fall, but not by much
Rosenritter
New member
The force of gravitational acceleration is the same on every piece of the building regardless of which floor it is on, what altitude it is at, what stress the material is under, or the composition of the material.
I think some real world problem solving might help drive the physics of this home. If you had to drop from a hundred stories, would you rather fall ten feet one hundred times, or a thousand feet all at once? Which fall (or falls) would leave you less likely to have broken legs (or die) at the end?
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.greenharbor.com/fffolder/speedtime.pdf
One hundred falls of a bit under a second each, of a total time of roughly 100 seconds?
Or one single fall of one thousand feet, of a total time of roughly 10 seconds?
Each time a fall gets broken by an object it is going to add more time to the fall. If the fall is "broken" by something insubstantial like a sheet paper or pigeon the difference will be inconsequential, but in the "official 911 story" the fall is broken by a solid structure designed to be load bearing.
With this in mind, dig up one of those several videos that were recorded of the collapse of those towers. When falling in the video, how long does it take to visually see the tower collapse down to the ground? It's falling at the same speed as if you dropped a rock through air in free fall. And the video shows debris blasting out floors below where it collapses before the collapse arrives. Not "melting" but debris blasting... like the way you would detonate the supports on a building in demolition, to bring the floors crashing down from the top at free-fall speed.
It's not my country and I have no interest in arguing with people here about this, but I will suggest that a little bit of discernment might be used before endorsing a crusade to place targeted ethnic groups in concentration camps. Perhaps a documentary like "Loose Change" might be beneficial (listen to both sides of an issue before making up one's mind.) The USA might not be the holy city on a hill that it's made out to be but that shouldn't matter. Our citizenship is in heaven regardless of what government or regime rules in the here and now.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
nope
it was broken by a severely damaged and weakened structure that no longer met design specs
Rosenritter
New member
Doser, tell yourself whatever you like. I understand that you will defend your stars and stripes against all blasphemy.
Pretty sure Doser is Canadian...
[MENTION=17501]ok doser[/MENTION] right?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
nope, true blue american
i live close to the canadian capitol and listen to their radio more than ours, so my slant on things often is from a canadian perspective
to complicate it further, i live in a state (new york) in which my conservative voice struggles to be heard over the clamor from the liberal population centers downstate
i'm in the pale pink county that looks like it's yelling across the lake at canada :chuckle:
i think the mouth is henderson harbor
i live close to the canadian capitol and listen to their radio more than ours, so my slant on things often is from a canadian perspective
to complicate it further, i live in a state (new york) in which my conservative voice struggles to be heard over the clamor from the liberal population centers downstate
i'm in the pale pink county that looks like it's yelling across the lake at canada :chuckle:
i think the mouth is henderson harbor
Ah, ok. :thumb:
nope, true blue american
i live close to the canadian capitol and listen to their radio more than ours, so my slant on things often is from a canadian perspective
to complicate it further, i live in a state (new york) in which my conservative voice struggles to be heard over the clamor from the liberal population centers downstate
i'm in the pale pink county that looks like it's yelling across the lake at canada :chuckle:
i think the mouth is henderson harbor
Do you dig back bacon,tukes, and Moosehead Beer, eh?
"Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world.”
You should have read the next part:
If it WEREN'T, Jesus said, his followers would rise up violently against the Romans.
The early Jesus movement was clearly nonviolent.
After the crucifixion, his followers did not join the military.
In 325 CE when the Roman Empire swallowed the Jesus movement, it was a hard and fast imperial rule that all male Jesus people were required to join the military.
You should have read the next part:
If it WEREN'T, Jesus said, his followers would rise up violently against the Romans.
The early Jesus movement was clearly nonviolent.
After the crucifixion, his followers did not join the military.
In 325 CE when the Roman Empire swallowed the Jesus movement, it was a hard and fast imperial rule that all male Jesus people were required to join the military.
That’s what we believe now.
Most believers would rather worship Christ than follow Jesus’ teachings.
drbrumley
Well-known member
:liberals:
There were a world of adversaries in the Roman world of Jesus' day.
Life was nasty, brutish and short.
An acquaintance with history will confirm this and a careful reading of the Bible backs this up.
Jesus counseled us to love our enemies.
He either said this or he didn't.
You cannot have it both ways.
Christians did not join the Roman army. But after the Jesus people were forced to join the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century, membership in the army was demanded of Christians.
Life was nasty, brutish and short.
An acquaintance with history will confirm this and a careful reading of the Bible backs this up.
Jesus counseled us to love our enemies.
He either said this or he didn't.
You cannot have it both ways.
Christians did not join the Roman army. But after the Jesus people were forced to join the Roman Empire in the Fourth Century, membership in the army was demanded of Christians.