• Rick Hayes

How 9/11 Should Have Changed Science.

By Rick Hayes



Scientifically accepted theories are considered accurate until proven otherwise, but Newton's laws in physics are still being taught in school even after being proved wrong on 9/11.


Before 9/11, everyone agreed with Newton's third law, which states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. So, according to Newton, when the upper 20 floors of WTC Building Two collapsed, they would have been met with a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction from the lower 90 floors. But that didn't happen on 9/11.


On 9/11, the 20 upper floors of WTC Building Two collapsed and exerted a force on the lower 90 floors; however, the lower 90 floors did not exert a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction back on the upper 20 floors. The result was that those 20 upper floors crushed all of the 90 floors below them into fine dust. Newton was incorrect.


If Newton's third law were correct, WTC Building Two would have had approximately 70 floors still standing. The collapse of the upper 20 floors of the 110 story building should have been offset by the equal and opposite reaction of the 90 lower floors. That didn't happen, proving Newton's third law is flawed.


Another one of Newton's laws that proved incorrect on 9/11 was Newton's first law of motion that states that objects move at a constant speed unless another force acts upon them.


WTC building seven had 47 floors of concrete and steel resistance. That means that when building seven collapsed on 9/11, the speed at which it fell should have reflected all of that resistance. Instead, it initially collapsed at "free fall" speed for the first 2.25 seconds. The government revised its findings to agree with this observation.


The significance of this fact can not be overstated. Converting the 2.25 seconds into an actual number of floors means that WTC seven fell a distance of eight floors at a speed equivalent to having no resistance or, in other words, empty space. Or, to put it another way, building seven went from a 47-floor building to a 39-floor building when eight floors disappeared during the initial stages of the collapse.


If Newton's first law of motion were correct, those eight floors should have provided resistance, slowing down the rate of collapse to something significantly longer than the 2.25 seconds of free-fall speed. But that didn't happen. Newton's first law of motion is false.


Yet, physics books continue to incorrectly instruct students regarding these flaws in Newton's "laws." Why?


Unless these unreliable assumptions are adjusted, future structural engineers will produce buildings based on erroneous information. Science and safety must come before time-honored tradition.

7 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

In yesterday's article, we spoke about the existence of nano-thermite in the 9/11 dust. There are many unanswered questions regarding the events on that beautiful September day with its clear blue sky

To grasp the reality as to why, after 21 years, so many Americans still do not trust the official explanation of 9/11 is as straightforward or as complicated as answering or explaining one of two crit