The Physics Community Is A Historical Laughing Stock

I quote what no-one replied to, below.

if indeed the towers were designed for that, perhaps
they were only designed for an *accidental* landing
of a 707, not a 757 diving at max speed, full of fuel.

whoever did this, put the biggest possible bombs
-- da planes -- into the tallest buildings. so,
per your adumbration of Muslim Fiziks,
what is your hypothesis as to the "proper rate of fall,"
given that it "collapsed" -- why should it not be "free" fall?

Also, they were designed to withstand a 707 impact,

thus:
in addition to my earlier cite of the Murrah Bldg. demolition,
I just found another, local example:
the hulk of the San Pedro Trade Center was demolished,
after years of languishing with For Lease signs,
reportedly with five pounds of explosives. only five pounds, but
it took all of 8 seconds for this, maybe, twenty-story girderwork
(most of the structure was removed around it, except
for the two gigantic concrete cores) to fall,
sort of listing to one side as it went.

the Pentagon is a massively concrete structure,
not the lightwieght (plane-like) stuff of skyscrapers!

never thought about cellphones in planes,
since I don't have one. does "everyone" confirm this
from practical experience -- no surfing in flight?

--it takes some to jitterbug!
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...litude.W05.pdf
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...s/plate01.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/33...o_science.html
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/howthenation.pdf

a British Subject had every right to "do" 010911 in film,
since more of them were in the building than any,
other foreigners; may be, even than *all* others?...
God-am day-traders; greed is -o-!

I just read that Sprint, or some outfit, just ended their sky-surfing
program;
so, is it or is it not possible to use a cellphone from a plane?

shows you, how many "miles" I have!

have a few red herrings, (Just how many of the people on Flight 93 were
using cell phones and how many were using the onboard passenger
phones?) but there are definitely some questions brought up that I
certainly can't answer.

there are two main issues: a)
whether or not we have a complete accounting of all
of the ordinary matter that's ** there[*]; b)
the annoying pervasiveness of Einsteinmania [**],
when plasma is so prevalent in Universe.

it's gotten so bad that, now,
universe is said to be, not just goign away from us, but
running away, faster & faster, which would seem
to put a kaibosh on any sort of sub-light travelling....
unless the spacecraft is also expanding like that, along
with the snoring passengers.

* there's no where, there. Galileo imposed his vacuum upon it
(which was really what the Jesuits couldn't take,
not that silly stuff about cosmocentrism, and
trying to get "his theory" published by his friend, the Pope
.... and that sucks .-)

** the musical, soon to be a major motion picture,
straight to DVD.

thus:
you could probably solve many of these problems, if
you had an explicit value for Brun's constant; at least,
the finity of them....
in the end, we are all good, ol'chum,
which I guess is where that "familiar" comes from!

The missing bit in H&L's twin primes conjecture is that, so far, nobody has
been able to /prove/ that a naive guess for twin primes /is/ wrong in
"exactly enough the same way" as a naive guess for pi(x) is wrong --
although all computational evidence to date strongly suggests that this is
so, and the heuristic argument supporting it is very attractive.

The complexity that you view as "chum" is actually required to solve
the problem.

thus:
what an incentive to attack; at least,
it's clearly labeled as a conjecture. the question is,
is it "ill-pozed?"

http://bfi.org/clinton_equal_central_angle_conjecture

thus:
Chum -- you could attract sharks with mathematicians!

thus:
to be featured in the next movie, "Harry Potter and
the 'Public' Charter Schools: Faith-based Initiatives
in the New Millennium CCE: Come the Rapture,
No Child Left Behind!:"
http://rand.org/news/press.06/08.07.html

--it takes some to jitterbug!
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...litude.W05.pdf
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...s/plate01.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/33...o_science.html
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/howthenation.pdf

wrote in message
ps.com...
|a British Subject had every right to "do" 010911 in film,
| since more of them were in the building than any,
| other foreigners; may be, even than *all* others?...
| God-am day-traders; greed is -o-!


You don't seem to object to our language, education and technology
so much though, do you, even if you can't spell "Goddamn" or "maybe".

Damn, I can't read the rest of your ****, I don't understand Gibberish,
I'd need an interpreter.
Androcles.

it's a joke; God am [a] day trader (or,
Greed is God). another joke is the occaisional usage
of Jews, "G-d," when the Hebrew uses no vowels.

another joke is the Spanish translation for "Lord." also,
I'd guess that the use of the compound from, Lord God, is
to dystinguish from the medeival patronymic, Lord (Sen~or,
which, after all, probably just means "senior,"
to your Jun~or .-)

so much though, do you, even if you can't spell "Goddamn" or "maybe".

thus:
so, why are there "dyscontinuities" at the top & bottom?

http://www.freewebtown.com/adrian/tmp/ico20g1.gif

thus:
to be featured in the next movie,
"Harry Potter's New Crusades and
the 'Public' Charter Schools: Faith-based Initiatives
in the New Millennium CCE: Come the Rapture,
No Child Left Behind!:"
http://rand.org/news/press.06/08.07.html

--it takes some to jitterbug!
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...litude.W05.pdf
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...s/plate01.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/33...o_science.html
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/200...scoop_soc.html
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/howthenation.pdf

in other words,
_The Love of Money Is Mammon_ by Adam Smiths Moneyworld
(published by WGBH, The BBC and The Holy Economist Magazine .-)

Greed is God). another joke is the occaisional usage

thus:
I add what was just preceding that in the introduction:
"It was always hard for many to comprehend how
Cantor's mathematical theorem could be re-christened
as a 'paradox' by Russell and how Goedel's theorem could
be so often declared to be the most significant result
of the 20th century."

"There was always the suspicion among scientists that such
extra-mathematical publicity movements concealed an agenda for
re-establishing belief
as a substitute for science. Now, one hundred years after Gödel's
birth, the organized
attempts to harness his great mathematical work to such an agenda have
become explicit."

thus:
I just can't follow your English, although
I *might* be able to work-out the math. so,
can you state what your method is, as a "precis,"
instead of laboriously "documenting" it?

of course, Fermat probably proved the odd-prime exponents,
firstly, then realized that n=4 was a special case,
thus resulting in one of his few, "published" proofs.

also, a nonmarginal proof!

thus:
I may be severely developmentally dysabled, but
I don't play slotmachines, either!
playing poker with a computer is for suckers

thus:
should have thought of that, but it's nice
to have it be explicit. so, this bug is a featurette,
actually giving the dome some thickness....
now, since it is completely nontrigonated,
the vertices would also have to be highly structural, or
else tendons might be strung between them,
across the skew facets; how?

http://www.freewebtown.com/adrian/tmp/ico20g1.gif

thus:
to be featured in the next movie,
"Harry Potter's New Crusades and
the 'Public' Charter Schools: Faith-based Initiatives
in the New Millennium CCE: Come the Rapture,
No Child Left Behind!:"
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/3333uk_scoop_soc.html

--it takes some to jitterbug!
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...litude.W05.pdf
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...s/plate01.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/33...o_science.html
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/howthenation.pdf

Lloyd Parker wrote:
In article .com,
"Schoenfeld" wrote:

Spoonfed wrote:
tadchem wrote:
An admission of the decision to "pull" the firefighters from the
building does not amount to a "demolition" of the building.

The kind of controlled implosion suggested by the paranoiacs requires
weeks to set up and perform, not hours, unless you got a little help
from a native Kryptonian.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

If legitimate, I think this video makes it pretty clear that the
building was indeed pulled.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...28412411043437

Since all of the surrounding buildings had been evacuated, a rush job
must have been performed to demolish the building. The rubble from
this demolition covered a fairly large area, which would not be the
case in the sort of controlled explosion that requires weeks to set up
and perform.

Schoenfeld still hasn't given any reference to official documentation
that says that WTC 7 wasn't pulled. All he has said is that it was
left out of the FEMA report. An absence which probably indicates that
FEMA knew the WTC 7 building had been intentionally demolished to save
the surrounding area.

FEMA made these findings:

"Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening
caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in
WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at
this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained
massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low
probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and
analyses are needed to resolve this issue." (Chapter 5, pg 31.)

On July 22, 2004, the 9/11 Commission Report was released, but made no
mention of 7.


Schoenfeld also suggests that the fire in WTC really wasn't so bad, and
shouldn't have been demolished, except that Silverstein stood to gain
huge insurance settlement, as Silverstein had insurance against acts of
terrorism, which would seem odd except that the World Trade Center was
attacked by terrorists many years previously.

No, silverstein got the lease a couple of months before 9/11..

According to a cnn internet poll, over 90% of the US population also
agree / or partially agree with this stuff.. You guys are in the
minority..

Heck, half the public believe in creationism. I wouldn't cite public opinion
to prove your case.

Only half? Whoa.. then I wouldn't rely on it at all! But you are right,
suicidal terrorists rammed planes full of innocent people into those
buildings. That is what caused their collapse. The people who try to
scream "inside job" or this explosives nonsense are either fools,
deliberate liars who want to hurt their own country and the civilized
world, or both. In short, they either have their heads in the sand or
firmly lodged somewhere else where the sun's rays do not illuminate....

Jonathan wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Lloyd Parker wrote:

Hey, Doofus, posting crap 3 times just makes it 3 times as crappy! Stop the
damn spam!

Here is one for Doofus.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/...gon/index.html

This might be the tip of the iceberg regarding anomalies in the
official story of 911.

This article has the potential of being very interesting, but it is
written in a very bland manner. It would be much more interesting if
it had a list of the mistakes and corrections that were made, as a
matter of public record.

It seems rather logical that if you were covering something up, you
would begin by covering up everything, and then as it became clear that
certain items were being revealed, it would be a simple matter to
revise your reports and point to the incompetence of the original
investigators.

As the flags on our bumpers begin to get covered in road dust,

I hope we never see the day they fade. Because science, and all modern
science and philosophy, would be on the chopping block if the 10th.
Century Islamists took over. No more women in the arts and sciences,
either.. good bye, Marie Curie...

perhaps
more people will be willing to ask the questions they have been
avoiding, and the information they think is interesting.

are you referring to the Rectal Dysplay Unit?

well, a.k.a. television, or the googolplex hereinat.

scream "inside job" or this explosives nonsense are either fools,
deliberate liars who want to hurt their own country and the civilized
world, or both. In short, they either have their heads in the sand or

thus:
the second construction, I think in the first URL,
with the strut-fromed hexahedra in a leaning tower,
looks like a good example of "aspension" -- iff
the bottom cube is well-grounded.

(http://home.hetnet.nl/~janmarcus1/Tensegrities0.htm), and I think it

thus:
in other words,
_The Love of Money Is Mammon_ by Adam Smiths Moneyworld
(published by WGBH, The BBC and The Holy Economist Magazine .-)
Greed is God). another joke is the occaisional usage

thus:
I add what was just preceding that in the introduction:
"It was always hard for many to comprehend how
Cantor's mathematical theorem could be re-christened
as a 'paradox' by Russell and how Goedel's theorem could
be so often declared to be the most significant result
of the 20th century."
"There was always the suspicion among scientists that such
extra-mathematical publicity movements concealed an agenda for
re-establishing belief
as a substitute for science. Now, one hundred years after Gödel's
birth, the organized
attempts to harness his great mathematical work to such an agenda have
become explicit."

thus:
I just can't follow your English, although
I *might* be able to work-out the math. so,
can you state what your method is, as a "precis,"
instead of laboriously "documenting" it?...
of course, Fermat probably proved the odd-prime exponents,
firstly, then realized that n=4 was a special case,
thus resulting in one of his few, "published" proofs....
also, a nonmarginal proof!

thus:
I may be severely developmentally dysabled, but
I don't play slotmachines, either!
playing poker with a computer is for suckers

thus:
should have thought of that, but it's nice
to have it be explicit. so, this bug is a featurette,
actually giving the dome some thickness....
now, since it is completely nontrigonated,
the vertices would also have to be highly structural, or
else tendons might be strung between them,
across the skew facets; how?
http://www.freewebtown.com/adrian/tmp/ico20g1.gif

thus:
to be featured in the next movie,
"Harry Potter's New Crusades and
the 'Public' Charter Schools: Faith-based Initiatives
in the New Millennium CCE: Come the Rapture,
No Child Left Behind!:"
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/3333uk_scoop_soc.html

--it takes some to jitterbug!
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.co...litude.W05.pdf
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...s/plate01.html
http://larouchepub.com/other/2006/33...o_science.html
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/howthenation.pdf