What Newton has to say about the collapse of WTC
Autor: Francisco Roland Di Biase | Publicado: 2013-04-11T21:17:00-03:00












Tradução para o inglês do meu artigo O que Newton tem a dizer sobre o colapso do WTC publicado em 2011 neste blog e na página do GlobalResearch.&nbsp;



What Newton has to say about
the collapse of WTC



By Francisco Roland Di
Biase





This article does not intend to go into details
of the reasons that led to the "attacks" of the WTC (World Trade
 Center), nor who was
responsible. My intention is simply to show the evidence together with some
basics physics concepts that the three buildings, that’s right, the Twin Towers
and Building 7 (WTC 7) were destroyed by the method of controlled demolition,
planned before the events of September 11, 2001. This conclusion becomes clear because
another explanation would violate the Laws of Physics like the official
explanation does.



First we need to establish the chronology of
events that led to the collapses. The North
Tower (WTC 1), with the big antenna on
top, was the first to be hit, at 08:45 eastern time (New York). It burned for 103 minutes over 5
floors and collapsed at 10:28. The South
 Tower (WTC 2) was hit, at
09:03 and burned for 56 minutes on 8 floors, it collapsed at 09:59. Both
buildings had 110 floors with a height of 415 meters. WTC 7 was
not hit by any airplane and collapsed at 17:20 of the same day in just 7
seconds.



The official explanation provided by the
department in charge to investigate the cause of the WTC collapse, NIST
(National Institute of Standards and Technology), is called Inward
Bowing Theory. It says that the columns of an arched wall bowed because
of the fires’ heat and were unable to withstand the gravitational loads (the
weight). These loads were transferred to the adjacent columns by the trusses,
which quickly became overloaded and in a rapid sequence, this instability
spread to all other walls. Then the section of the building above the impact
point (near the 98th floor), acting as a rigid block leaned at least 8 degrees
south. The downward motion of this block was more than the damaged structure
could withstand, and the global collapse began. From that point on, NIST
apparently based on the “pile-driver” hypothesis suggested in a series of
articles by Zdenek Bazant with several co-authors. He describes a scenario
where the top of the building (part above the point of impact) remains solid as
it destroys the bottom. Only when the bottom was completely destroyed in a
compact pile of rubble, the top is them destroyed.






 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 

 
Inward Bowing Theory



You may find this explanation odd because the
most widespread theory of how the towers collapsed is the "pancake
theory" created by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). It
postulates a progressive failure of the floor system of the WTC towers ie somehow
the floors got loose and were colliding with each other. It had to be discarded
by NIST because in the numerous tests it was concluded that even at much higher
temperatures than those suggested in the WTC fire the floor system, consisting
of a frame of steel trusses, built with concrete, connecting the core columns
with the external, not collapsed.



As for the WTC 7, the collapse is attributed to
a failure of a single column that was supported by beams in a complex scenario
involving thermal expansion of these beams, due to isolates office fires. Then
they say that the interior of the building collapsed within its own footprint
and was followed by the external walls that had become a hollow shell. Thus,
according to NIST, the videos that exist only show the collapse of the external
walls.



Well those are the official explanations
provided by NIST that was tasked by the Bush administration to investigate the
causes of the collapse, in another words, if we think the US government
is telling the truth we must believe in these explanations.



Now let's point out some observations that can
be made ​​in numerous videos of the collapses that make the official
explanation, at least, forced and the mainstream media chose not to show
(censored?), or show, but did not emphasize the most important points.



The three WTC buildings were the only high rise
buildings to collapse due to fire damage before and after September 11, this
never happened before or again. A few examples are the One
Meridian Plaza
building with 38 storeys, in Philadelphia,
caught fire on February 23, 1991 that lasted 18 hours, spread over 8 floors but
not collapsed.





One Meridian Plaza
 Building



On October 17, 2004, a building in Caracas with 56 floors,
built in 1976, caught fire which lasted 17 hours and spread over 26 floors and
not collapsed.





Caracas, October 17, 2004



In February 2005 there was a huge fire at the Windsor Tower,
a skyscraper in Madrid
that lasted about 20 hours and the building, once again, not collapsed. We see
in the picture clearly that the building was engulfed in flames, but at the end
the structure remained standing.





&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Windsor Tower
in flames&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;and after the fire

&nbsp;


A significant information about the fire that
most people do not know is that when he has this whitish yellow color like in
the picture is because it's burning up too much oxygen. In the case of the WTC
the fire was dark red with very dark smoke indicating that there was hardly any
more oxygen to burn, and without oxygen the fire is extinguished and does not
burn.






 
WTC in flames



In the wreckage of the WTC were found pools of
molten metal and even though it rained between 14 and 21 September, having been
used fire retardant and water, firefighters managed to extinguish the fire only
on December 13. Do not forget that steel (the metal used in the structure of
the WTC) melts only at 1510°C
and burning office furniture can come in the most favorable conditions, even with
jet fuel to 760º C. For NIST's theory to work, the steel would have to reach at
least 980º C. Below is a picture taken in infrared by NASA which was recorded
surface temperatures a few days after September 11. The molten metal found by
workers at ground zero were with temperatures twice as high, for being in the
basement and the elevator shafts, well below the surface.





&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Molten metal&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Temp registered by NASA



During the collapse of the Twin Towers,
metal rods weighing many tons were ejected sideways more than 150 meters at speeds
exceeding 100 km/h
(or 60 mph).
A video that can be viewed on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=eHnLlwqiu0A) shows an analysis by David Chandler, where he explained how
it calculated the horizontal velocity of these objects.





Metal been ejected sideways



A section of the building weighing more than
300 tons was embedded in the American Express building about 120 meters (circa of 120 yards) away.





Piece of the WTC embedded in
the Amex building



Some "experts" were on television saying
that these pieces of the WTC were ejected laterally due to air that was being
moving in the core of the building that was essentially hollow and was being
compressed as the top came crushing the bottom. But keep in mind that the air
being compressed does not have a prefer direction to follow, the standard would
be to take the entire floor and then blow all the windows while leaving the
building. And as we can see in the picture below there were poofs of air far
below the line of destruction.





Poofs of air in the WTC



No other building around the towers, other the
WTC 7 which was more distant, as can be seen in the schematic of the WTC
complex, collapsed due to fire and damage caused by debris from the towers.





WTC complex schematic



WTC 3, a 22-story building directly below the
towers was split in half by the debris but did not collapse.





WTC 3



WTC 4, a 9-storey building was almost completely
destroyed but the structure remained standing.





WTC 4



WTC 5 had 9-story, suffered from a severe fire
and damage caused by debris but did not collapse.





WTC 5



WTC 6, 8 floors, suffered massive damages due
to wrecks and fires but did not fall.






 
WTC 6



We must also remember that several people,
including Brian Clark, manager of the firm Eurobrokers, managed to leave the
top of the towers. They were above the impact point, and managed to get to the lobby
saving themselves. If the fire was hot enough to weaken steel, at least 900° C,
how these people manage to do this?



Contrary to what happened with the twin towers,
causing considerable damage to adjacent structures, WTC 7 collapsed symmetrical
directly into it’s on footprint with a total disintegration of the steel structure
and limited damage to adjacent structures as seen in the photos below.





WTC 7 after the collapse






WTC complex after the collapses





Firefighters and several witnesses reported a
series of explosions before and during the collapse of the towers as seen in
the video "Fireman Explosion Testimony" on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO1ps1mzU8o).
And in this other video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I)
called "Explosions on 911 " several firefighters have been together in
a pay phone calling home telling their families that they are ok. Suddenly they
are startled by a loud sound of an explosion. This is one of the explosions in
WTC 7 that occurred long before its collapse.



As the buildings were collapsing they created a
pyroclastic cloud of pulverize concrete that is much more common to be seen in
volcanic eruptions than in collapsing buildings.






 
Pyroclastic cloud



Evidence of the incendiary Thermite was found in
steel samples collected. This material which is a combination of aluminum with
iron oxide reaches temperatures of 2400° C in 2 seconds and is commonly used in
controlled demolitions for cutting structural steel columns. In this video
"9/11 Experiments: The Great Debate Thermate" by Jonathan Cole (http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g) we see an experiment where the thermite is used to cut
a steel beam. Once that the two materials begin to react, the energy released
is so great that melts steel.




 
&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;











Metal pieces of WTC. They
are evidence of molten steel and severe erosion by high temperature documented
by FEMA in Appendix C of its report. Subsequent analysis also revealed the
signature of thermite.



In addition to thermite, a material that should
not be in the WTC, a group of scientists led by physicist Steven Jones found in
dust samples (those clouds of pulverized concrete) what they called
nano-thermite. Their findings were published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, Volume 2, with the title
"Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
Center Catastrophe" and were confirmed by chemical engineer Mark Basile
who found the same material. Unlike thermite, an incendiary material,
nano-thermite is explosive.



The first thing they found were microspheres
rich in iron (photo below) that are a signature of a thermitic reaction. In
addition to them the USGS (United States Geological Survey), a government
agency, and the environmental firm RJ Lee also found these spheres.




 
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;












Then Steve Jones with the help of physicist
Jeff Ferrer, an expert in the use of scanning and transmission electron microscopes,
found the red/gray chips that are unreacted nano-thermite.





Red/gray chips



The nano-thermite is basically composed of
aluminum and iron oxide, such as thermite, in an array of silicon with carbon,
an organic component used to generate gas making the material explosive. What
made these scientists to characterize this kind of thermite as nano-thermite
was precisely their scale. This material begins to react only when the
temperature reaches 430º C, so it’s necessary to use some incendiary to generate
that temperature. Then, once is ignite, the oxygen passes from the iron oxide
to the aluminum releasing large amounts of energy and generating molten iron.



To create the micro-spheres the only plausible
explanation so far is that when the nano-thermite explodes, it generates molten
iron that is ejected into the air very quickly, and similarly when it rains the
water falls as droplets, the molten iron form droplets that quickly cooled
before reaching the ground, forming the micro-spheres.



If we going to analyze the collapse of the WTC
towers we must at least have an idea of ​​how the towers were built and some of
the characteristics are really interesting.



The core of each tower was a rectangle of 26.5
by 40.5 meters,
divided into 47 steel columns that ranged from 91.5 by 40.5 centimeters to
56 by 132 centimeters
and were much thicker at the base. In this core was where the elevators (each
tower had 99), ladders, pipes and pipe maintenance were, in other words,
despite this massive steel structure in the center to support the building, the
core was basically empty.





WTC tower being built





WTC tower schematic



As for the external perimeter walls they were
composed of a dense frame of vertical steel columns with a layer of steel
spandrel enclosing each floor.





Assembling of the external
layer



This external layer was constructed with pieces
of steel prefabricated consisting of three vertical columns with three
horizontal steel spandrels welded together. Adjacent parts were bolted, column with
column in the top and bottom, spandrels with their neighbors on which side with
numerous screws.






 
Pieces used in the external
layer



There were 59 columns on the external layer of
each face and one column in the beveled corner, a total of 240 external columns
in each tower. And as the columns in the core at the base they were much thicker
than in the top.






 
Tower in construction



The towers were supported by this external
layer, which stiffen its structure, along with the core columns making it very
efficient to withstand lateral wind loads. And according to Frank Demartini, construction
project manager of the WTC, they were designed to withstand the impact of one
or more commercial airplanes, ie, this structure should withstand the impact of
an aircraft Boeing 707, the largest commercial airplane at the time. And
despite the 707 being smallest than the 767 the kinetic energy of the two is
equivalent once the 707 travels at higher speeds.





Schematic of WTC structure



WTC 7 was a skyscraper of 47 floors which was
not hit by an airplane and had minor damage caused by the collapse of the Twin Towers.
You could see scattered fires in the building (pictured below) but to no
concern and according with NIST these fires made the columns buckle and the
building collapse.





Scattered fires in WTC 7



The interesting thing is that the building did
not fall as expected where the fire is gradually causing minor damage and the
collapse occurs asymmetrically by the path of least resistance. Just watch the
fire consume the wood in a fireplace, it is gradually consuming the wood and
causing localized and asymmetric collapses.



Now to the point that would make Newton roll in his grave.
The collapse has an free fall acceleration i.e. the acceleration of gravity,
and we can’t forget, occur through the path of greatest resistance. And that is
really important because you can only happening when the support columns are
removed simultaneously through the entire structure. Let me explain, we need a
little basic physics (Newton's laws), nothing we have not learned in high
school, to prove that other forces were involved in the destruction, by the
simple fact that it is impossible to a building achieve a free fall
acceleration with only the force of gravity acting.



The acceleration of gravity is nothing more
than the rate at which the an object speed increases in free fall, neglecting
air resistance. It causes an object to increase its speed to about 9.78m/s
every second (usually abbreviated to 9.78 m/s2). It has small
variations at each site on the planet, but in New York is &nbsp;9.808 m/s2.



Isaac Newton showed that the acceleration of an
object is governed by the mass of the object and the resultant force acting on
it (Newton's Second
Law: &nbsp;&nbsp;F = m x a). If the acceleration of
a falling object is equal to the acceleration of gravity, then the resultant
force is only the force of gravity.



In addition, Newton's Third Law tells us that when objects
interact they exert equal and opposite forces between them. So as an object is
falling if it exerts a force on objects in its path, the same objects will
exert the same force, just in the opposite direction, i.e. upwards, which will
decrease the acceleration of fall. If an object is observed in free fall we can
safely conclude that nothing in its path exerts a breaking force and by Newton's Third Law the
falling object can’t be colliding with any other object as well.



Usually when the top of a building collapses we
expect to see the falling part hit the structure bellow exerting a considerable
force. But is not what occurs in WTC 7 and we know this because the top of WTC
7 fell at freefall, not near free
fall. It fell by almost 2.5 seconds at a rate of free fall, i.e., 9,808 m/s2.
If the top had crushed the part bellow, this parts would have reacted with a
strength of the same intensity but opposite that would have decreased the
acceleration of falling block. As the fall has not decreased, we conclude that
the interaction force was zero in both directions.



An analysis was made ​​by David Chandler and
posted on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth#p/u/58/CpAp8eCEqNA)
using an analysis software in a video made ​​by CBS with a fixed camera pointed
almost perpendicular to the north wall. This software allowed him to obtain
data of distance and time as the building collapsed. From these data it was
possible to calculate the speed (distance / time) of the building fall and
acceleration (velocity / time) and build the graph below. The procedure was
calibrated with the heights of two points in the building provided in the NIST report
of August 2008. The measurements indicate that the building fell, for about 2.5
seconds in freefall. This is equivalent to eight floors in which the falling
part did not find any resistance. For other eight floors met minimal
resistance, and even then continued to accelerate, but at a lesser rate than
free fall. Only after these 16 floors fall, began to have significant
interaction with the structure and slowed down.



WTC 7
- Velocity x Time




 
&nbsp;

In the graph we see that the horizontal axis is
the measure of time in seconds and the vertical axis is the measure of velocity
in meters per second. The rate is in negative numbers because is downward the
same applies to the acceleration which is the relationship between velocity and
time. We clearly see three stages of acceleration, the first lasting almost one
second where the building flutters losing rigidity and begins to fall, the
second is when we have the free fall acceleration, indicated by the blue line,
for about 2.5 seconds and a third that lasts slightly less than one second
where the rate of acceleration decreases and then it stops.



For those who are thinking that the free fall happens
only for 2.5 seconds and not through all the collapse and can be explained to
some extent if we consider the process as a whole make no mistake. The fact is
that even 2.5 seconds of free fall is not consistent with any scenario
involving natural weakening, bending or crushing because in this scenario there
would be enormous forces of interaction with the structure bellow that would
slow the fall. Knowing that even in controlled demolitions not enough
structures are removed to allow free fall, how could a office fire be more
destructive? Adding the support columns removal in sync around the building perimeter
as seen by the unevenness of the top, by the abrupt collapse and the immediate
transition to full support for&nbsp; free fall
we concluded that a natural collapse with acceleration of gravity is not
possible . But nevertheless occurred, meaning that it was not a natural
collapse, other forces were involved, which destroyed the support columns of
WTC 7.



David Chandler also has done an analysis of the
collapse of the North Tower (WTC 1) which can be viewed on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=32-Ctx7MhKY). And just as the official explanation for the collapse of
WTC 7 contradicts the laws of physics the explanation for WTC 1 is also
inconsistent because the acceleration that the top of the tower acquires as it
falls is a result of the building lower part disintegration and not the cause.



The twin towers of the WTC were destroyed from
top to bottom, specifically the section of the building's 98th floor upwards
seems to drop and accelerate towards the ground through the 98 floors below.



For the analysis he used a high-quality video
of Etienne Sauret (similar version on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGAofwkAOlo)
pointed to the north face, identifiable by the hole of the aircraft impact. The
video was chosen because it shows an almost flat and perpendicular view of the tower’s
face of a stationary camera in the distance. Using the video analysis it was
possible to acquire data of distance and time and calculate the acceleration of
the fall. The time base was calibrated with information from the NTSC standard
i.e. 29.97 frames per second. The vertical scale was calibrated by the spacing
between floors that is known, 3.66 meters. The vertical position of the roof
was mark every six frames (0.2 seconds) and the fall was follow until the
moment when the roof disappears behind the dust cloud, in other words by approximately
32 meters.
The data obtained is on the table below:






 
&nbsp;

In the first column we have the frames (starts
at 216 because the video does not begin at the time of the collapse), in the 2nd
the time (the 0:00 is when the collapse starts), in the 3rd the vertical
length and in the last the computed velocity. These data generated the graph
below.



WTC 1
- Velocity x Time




 
&nbsp;

The velocity vs. time graph shows an almost
uniform acceleration of the 6th point computed on. When the roof starts to
fall, quickly achieves an almost uniform acceleration of -6.31 m/s2.



The following analysis is based on the “pile-driver”
theory of Bazant considering the top of the building as a solid mass m. The
only relevant forces acting on the block in fall are the gravity (P = mg) and a normal force (N) upward due to the interaction with
the building lower section. Applying Newton's
Second Law we have the resultant force (gravity minus the normal force) equals
mass times acceleration:



mg - N = ma



reorganizing we have:

N = mg - ma



As shown in the graphic the acceleration (a) of the sixth point onward is -6.31
m/s2, which is the same as 64% of the acceleration of gravity (0.64g). So our equation becomes:



N = mg - 0,64mg = 0,36mg



Then the
normal force (N) upward is 36% of the weight of the block that is on top as
shown below.







Calling forth Newton's Third Law we get a very strange
situation. As the interaction forces are equal and opposite the falling block
exerts a force of only 36% of its weight in the lower section of the building.
In other words, since the falling block is accelerating we have a
counter-intuitive result that the force exerted on the lower section of the
building is significantly smaller than the static weight of the block. It's
hard to imagine how the upper block exerting a force of only 36% of the block static
weight could destroy the lower section bigger, stronger and with no damage when
the building itself was designed to handle several times its own weight.



The fact that an accelerated block could exert
a smaller force than its own weight in the target block can be intuitively
difficult to accept, but that is because our experience tells us that the
target block would resist the destructive impact. A hammer moving fast and
hitting a nail into a solid block of wood normally exerts a force on the nail
much greater than its own weight. But this is only true if the nail resists the
impact. The biggest force driving the nail into the wood is matched by another
force that simultaneously slows down the hammer, and that is why several blows
are required. However, if the nail is placed in a block of polystyrene, it will
not withstand the impact. He will be pushed into the block with very little
strength. The hammer will find a resistance so low that will be able to
accelerate all the time. In the case of WTC 1, the falling block acts as a
hammer driving the nail to the polystyrene, but looking from another angle, is
the interface between the blocks that is "soft". Another thing other
than the falling block (explosives?) needs to be destroying the structural
integrity of the interface zone that offers only a small fraction of the
resistance that was designed.



Jonathan Cole has done experiments where he
demonstrates how a falling object exerts a force smaller than its weight. The
video is on YouTube and is called “9/11 Experiments: Newton vs. NIST” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=tejFUDlV81w). He also demonstrated how a block (the top of the building)
falling on top of a column of blocks mounted on top of each other (the rest of
the building) can not destroy the column. Video “Jonathan Cole - 9/11: Collapse
vs. Demolition” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkXeNawHFFo).
Those videos are very instructive to watch.



Either way, they may want to argue that in
terms of resistance of various materials, the impact of the falling block would
destroy the lower section of the building, but the fact is that it could not
destroy maintaining a constant acceleration. Also, if you look in terms of momentum
we have that any increase in the force in the lower section of the building
must be accompanied by a loss of momentum in the falling block to slow it down.
So he should experience a "bump" that would be visible in the video.
But the fact is that the block continues to move without slowing down, it is
clear that there was no "bump" in spite of the sharp deflection of
the building in the first three seconds.



Combining this analysis with the others
evidences shown is clearly that some form of controlled demolition was
happening, but not one as normally seen, because the building was destroyed
from top to bottom, the wreckage were not contained within the footprint and
various parts of the structure were ejected laterally by several meters,
causing damage to adjacent buildings.



So we can conclude that once the collapse was
not caused naturally, he was necessarily caused by man. And, as has been argued
was a controlled demolition that clearly was planned before September 11. And
if it was planned in advance so we have a conspiracy and not a conspiracy
theory. Because it happened, and several people were necessarily involved in
order to demolish the building which means that the U.S. government has
blatantly lied to justify two invasions which defied International Law (UN
Charter) and the Geneva Conventions and has killed more than 1.5 million
people.



Now despite all that
information you still has doubt that
the U.S.
government would be able to lie about such a
thing, research about the Gulf of Tonkin incident. This
event is considered the main cause for the U.S.
entering in the Vietnam War. The official story was
that a U.S. ship had been attacked by North
Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin.
But that story fell
apart when Daniel Elsberg leaked to the
media the Pentagon Papers with was a set
of documents that had been ordered
by the State Department to register the true
history of the
Vietnam War. Then we learned
that the Gulf
of Tonkin
incident never happened, was manufactured for the U.S. population as a
justification for going to war



Other documents, declassified, which also
suggest what the U.S.
government is capable are the Northwood Documents. With them we learn how the
military intended to shoot down airline airplanes, with or without passengers,
and blame Cuba
to justify an invasion in the 1960s. They were signed by the Joint Chiefs and
lacked only the signature of the president to be authorized.



Richard Feynman one of the greatest physicists
of today, and one of the scientists responsible for discovering the cause of
the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986, once said "No
matter how beautiful your theory is, no matter how clever you are. If it does
not agree with experiment, is wrong".





Note:



Most of the videos witch I refer can also be
found on page http://911speakout.org along
with more relevant information.







References:



Articles



Destruction of the World Trade
 Center North
 Tower and Fundamental
Physics (Running Title: Downward Acceleration of WTC 1) by David Chandler

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2010/ChandlerDownwardAccelerationOfWTC1.pdf



Freefall and Building 7 on 9/11 by David
Chandler

http://911speakout.org/Freefall.pdf



Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust
from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe by Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey
Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth,
Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen, publish in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, volume 2,
pg 7-31.

http://www.bollyn.com/public/Active_Thermite_at_WTC.pdf





Internet sites



Architects &amp; Engineers for 9/11 TRUTH

http://www.ae911truth.org/



Pentagon Papers

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pentagon/pent1.html



Northwood Documents

http://www.prisonplanet.com/northwoods.pdf



Wikipedia – World Trade
 Center

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_trade_center





Documentaries films



9/11: Blueprint For Truth – Richard Gage
presentation of AE911Truth

http://www.youtube.com/user/xykojedi#grid/user/2F53AB1B2BB164F8



Loose Change (final cut) by Dylan Avery

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28QukKjwLtI&amp;feature=fvst



911 – In Plane Site (director’s cut) by Dave
vonKleist&nbsp; &amp; William Lewis

http://www.youtube.com/user/xykojedi#grid/user/1D5176D449F612CD



Zero: An Investigation Into 9-11 by Giulietto
Chiesa, Franco Fracassi, Francesco Trento, Thomas Torelli &amp; Paolo Jormi
Bianchi

http://www.youtube.com/user/xykojedi#grid/user/0191BA577D5AC9E0