I kept getting interrupted when I tried to watch the video, but the physics appeared sound to me.Originally Posted by psikeyhackr
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ewt.html#ntcon
I remember Newton's own words saying that an applied force is proportional to the rate of change of momentum of the body (not F=ma per se). F=dp/dt, if you will. It's really a matter of semantics for classical mechanics though. In quantum mechanics and optics, photon momenta and radiation "pressure" gets a little "trickier" since you can't weigh the things...
There are a few places that mention the steel and concrete floor masses/loads.
[metric units from my review]
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/...tc/godfrey.htm
http://www.911research.com/papers/tr...lysisFinal.htm
http://911research.wtc7.ent/mirrors/...ews-record.htm
http://www.journalof911studies.com/v...TwinTowers.pdf
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...lueprints.html
[I've found some questionable findings in this MIT paper IMHO]
http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfil...Structures.pdf
[Very suspect findings in this paper with gems like:]
"Additionally, the FEMA team carried the computer analysis only to a point in time immediately after the impacts; they did not consider the effects of the fire."
http://132.236.67.210/EngrWords/issu...ensonC_PR1.pdf
Regarding the WTC Tower oscillations, these should be impulse-driven, damped oscillations (likely harmonic due to the symmetry in Tower construction). Impulse physics is not well understood AFAIK (usually instrumented crash-test-dummy type stuff). And yes, these SHOULD BE accounted for in an ACCURATE computer model... Who has the source code of the simulations exactly?
