Quote:
originally posted by tw
During destructive events, loadbearing members of smaller skyscrapers fail, that floor collapses, yet what remains is intact. But to build them higher, then load bearing members cannot withstand a collapse of just one floor. If any one floor collapses on excessively tall buildings, then entire building pancakes. However and for some unknown reason, Hubris Boy 'knows' that if any one floor of any building collapses, then it is normal for all buildings to pancake. That is normal? What about those buildings in Kobe Japan? His conclusion - buisness as usual because he 'knows' it would cost too much to build as smaller skyscrapers are constructed and because there will be a demand for real estate. He just 'knows' without a doubt.
|
Once again, we have left-wing militant extremists holding forth, at great and tedious length, on subjects about which they know nothing. In this case: engineering.
Hubris Boy KNOWS that a body at rest tends to remain at rest, and a body in motion tends to remain in motion. Anybody else who was awake in high school physics class KNOWS this too; apparently, tw is not a member of this elite group.
Hubris Boy also paid close attention in his Strength of Materials I & II classes when he was a freshman engineering student. Consequently, Hubris Boy KNOWS that steel, when heated to around 800° C or so, starts to melt.
These two facts are important, because they are the reasons behind the collapse of the WTC towers. I will explain in terms so simple that even tw will be able to understand:
When the militant extremists crashed their aircraft into the building, the worst thing they did was not the impact of the aircraft itself; rather, it was the introduction of about 24,000 gallons of burning jet fuel into the structure. As the jet fuel burned, it heated to structural steel members nearby to the point that they began to melt. When they began to melt, they became unable to support the cumulative weight of the floors above them.
Unfortunately, the floors above them weighed somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 tons. At this point, the floors above the fire began to move. Downward. As explained above, they continued to move downward until they came to rest on the ground, there being no intervening structural members of sufficient strength to arrest the movement. The whole event could be described with 3 or 4 simple and elegant formulas, but I won't bother because I don't want to confuse readers like tw.
FIRE is what destroyed the WTC. Not the impact of the aircraft. Not the height or weight of the building. Fire. There's not a building in the world that could have survived the sort of punishment that was inflicted on the WTC. Fire is a factor that Kobe didn't have to contend with. Comparing the performance of the WTC to the performance of the buildings in Kobe, Japan is sort of like comparing the performance of a lawnmower to the performance of a volleyball. It's really not a very meaningful comparison. Any engineer will tell you the same thing. TW is not an engineer.* TW is not qualified to have an opinion on the subject. TW's "writing" on the subject is irrelevant gibberish, and educated Cellar consumers will notice this and proceed accordingly. (*At least, I certainly HOPE tw isn't an engineer. If tw IS an engineer, his license should be revoked.)
Quote:
originally posted by tw
Hubris Boy probably also does not know that most financial firms had been considering moves to NJ anyway because they did not have to be located in expensive NYC. IOW there is a shortage of class A real estate - in Jersey. Not in crowded, expensive, and now to be even more expensive NYC. NYC real estate insurance rates will increase substancially.
|
Hubris Boy is well aware of the fact that many large companies, headquartered in NY, threaten to do this all the time. They usually do it when militant extremists on the New York city council threaten to raise taxes in order to support their militant extremist agenda. The companies never really leave, though. Manhattan is too much fun.
Quote:
originally posted by tw
(contrary to Hubris Boy's erroneous comments on building insurance)
|
There's nothing erroneous about my comment.
Only one of the WTC towers was insured.