Problem is that none of your experiments that I have seen use materials that behave in any way like those used in the towers. Tooth picks and paper collars all absorb shock, thus cannot demonstrate the effect of the dynamic load on the floor slabs. Quite irrelevant results follow.
Without the floor system the building could not have stood. The floor trusses restrained lateral movement in the columns. Without them, the columns would be far too slender to stand on their own. In that sense, the building WAS held up by the "floor slabs."
sounds like psi toasted another one of your crazy theories. the floor at best is accessory, not primary, it was a part of the system, but in and of itself did nothing to "hold up" the building. the core and exo did that. without any lateral external forces either the core of exo would have stood forever with no floors at all.
Yeah right, the horizontal beams in the core were irrelevant. That is why we never see a flat layout of how they were arranged on each floor or how much heavier they got down the building. Everyone is supposed to blame the floors outside of the core for the collapse. psik
Where in anything that I said did you see me say that beams in the core were irrelevant? You keep leaping to these weird conclusions. The floors did hold up the building. They were required to transfer load between in the inner and outer columns. Without them, neither system could stand on its own. The idea that a 1000 foot tall 14" wide column of steel could stand without any lateral bracing is more than dumb.
its only dumb if one applies external forces beyond its natural ability not to tip over with the expectation it will stand. for instance, build a 10 mile x 10 mile square COLUMN, 100 foot thick at the base tapering to 1 foot thick at the top, that is 1000 ft tall..... it would stand no matter how much lateral force you are capable of applying. however as I said, and my statement is correct, for thin columns, lateral forces removed, they would stand forever with no bracing what so ever. the vertical columns et al are self supporting, the horizontal anything creates the lattice structure that is a dead weight upon the vertical columns. you can do this really simple experiment and poke a piece of spaghetti into clay and it will stand forever. not mystery science like you pretend it is. I hope this helps you to get that crazy (*)(*)(*)(*) out of your head that the floors HELD UP the building, in any way, because they did not. in fact they are a dead weight on the building.
This is literally the poster-child for what is wrong with you and the Truther movement koko. You actually upped the ignorance ante with that one koko.
Hmm.. Do I attempt to explain yield strength to a moron or continue to use the ignore feature. The choice is obvious.
yeh it makes it a bit more difficult for troughers to spew their usual diatribe of ignorance out here and I am glad you took notice that its so simple even complete total morons can figger it out.
yes please put on the mr obvious hat and do TEACH us IN DETAIL that when you hit spaghetti with a 20 pound sledge hammer it breaks. No one out here would have guessed!
In the real world, external forces actual do exist. True story. Shall you attempt two-for-two with your moronic non sequiturs?
ok then! So you just want to agree with me then and pretend there is an argument that makes you look superior even though fang is incorrect. nice double team fail
[QUOTE="some moron:]its only dumb if one applies external forces beyond its natural ability not to tip over with the expectation it will stand.[/QUOTE] External forces exist in the real world. True story. I know you live in a vacuum koko, but structures don't
again I explained to you, you claim to be an architectural engineer then what the (*)(*)(*)(*) is the problem here? I said: if one applies external forces beyond its natural ability not to tip over for instance, build a 10 mile x 10 mile square COLUMN, 100 foot thick at the base tapering to 1 foot thick at the top, that is 1000 ft tall..... it would stand no matter how much lateral force you are capable of applying. however as I said, and my statement is correct, for thin columns, lateral forces removed, they would stand forever with no bracing what so ever. Hence a stand alone column that you have not disputed, hence the fizzy aches are bonafide. why are you defending fangs thoughtless error
Which strawman of yours am I supposed to agree with? The tapering 10 mile by 10 mile column, or the stand alone column of undertimed height, thickness, or material? Also, they clearly are in a vacuum with no external forces being applied I guess with the exception of gravitational forces? Not sure, because you don't bother applying anything useful in your examples because you don't know what the eff you're talking about. That's very apparent. So in answer to your query, no I'm not going to defend either of your irrelevant examples.
well the first order of business is to learn the english language the only straw men here are those you are creating
Internal forces exist as well. Clearly what is needed here is an animated GIF of the pyramid at Meidum.
oh well by all means enlighten us to those overwhelming internal mystery forces that clearly supports your error.
The level of irony here is undetermined fvckwit. Now, I CLEARLY pointed out the fallacies in your analogies and tried to pin you down on their lack of relevancy. Answer for them or continue to be treated like the retard that you appear to be. Anyone else notice koko didn't bother to try and defend his analogies? By notice, I mean totally expect it. 3 conclusions can be drawn from this 1- Koko didn't realize what he was talking about but figured he would blunder his way past his insecurites. 2- Koko is a complete troll and will do anything in an attempt to win the internets. 3- See #1 and #2. Nice debatin' with ya kokolicious. - - - Updated - - - The internal forces that exist in that vacuum between your ears.
I mentioned your pyramid, I was referring to this additional strawman: Clearly, your dumb pyramid wouldn't fall into the category of a 'thin" column now would it? That was the second of your strawmen I referred to. I know you have a hard time keeping count, but it was pretty easy to do. I ignored the stupid spaghetti one, so you're welcome for that. Consider it a freebie cause it's Friday.
For much hilarity, everyone should consider the proportion of koko's tapered "column" that's a 1000 ft high. I guess I wasn't paying attention to the 10 mile by 10 mile thing closely enough. lol
You can totally make a column that's 100' wide at the base, 1' wide at the top, and 26,419' long. You can even imagine a world of unicorns and sasquaches that does not contain "external forces" in which you could pin that column to the ground, and to other "columns" headed off in tangent directions. But can you calculate the bending moment at the median of the span if it's angled at 2.17 degrees relative to the ground? I can. It doesn't look good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bending_moment
