|
|
|
|
Media and readers of my articles about
atomic bombs 1945,
moon trips
1969, M/S Estonia
ferry incident 1994 and 911
tower top down terrorist collapses
2001 are warned. You probably suffer from
cognitive
dissonance and cannot handle my
information without getting mentally disturbed with
serious consequences. My proven facts are simple and
correct and good news. A-bombs do not work. Humans
cannot travel to the Moon. M/S Estonia didn't lose
her bow visor. Skyscrapers do not collapse from top
down. All information to the contrary is pseudoscience,
propaganda lies or fantasies promoted by
media and taught at universities. And
if you do not agree with the official lies, you
will not be allowed at the university boat race*
and other silly events, etc. Your position in
society is at risk. If you suffer from cognitive
dissonance, you no doubt find my info
disturbing and get upset, angry, anxious or
worried. What to believe and write? Old lies or
truth? Media incl. newspaper chief editors are
kindly requested to get psychological assistance to
get rid of their cognitive
dissonance. Why not cure
yourself? And publish the result as a scoop. *Safety at sea is my
business (a) IN
GENERAL.- Congress affirms that the authority of
the President to use all necessary and
appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization
for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50
U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority
for the Armed Forces of the United States to
detain covered persons (as defined in
subsection (b)) pending disposition under the
law of war. (b)
COVERED PERSONS. - A covered person under this
section is any person as
follows: (1) A
person who planned, authorized, committed, or
aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001,
or harbored those responsible for those
attacks. (2) A
person who was a part of or substantially
supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated
forces that are engaged in hostilities against
the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a
belligerent act or has directly supported such
hostilities in aid of such enemy
forces. National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2012 It would
appear Prof. Bazant and others mentioned below
are covered persons to be detained as per above
US law as they suggest and support the false
idea that flying planes into weak tops of towers
will cause the structural destruction of the
strong bottoms of the towers. You wonder why
they are still at large. Is the President or
military sleeping? Like the FBI? I will explain
more at the Engineering
Mechanics Institute conference at
Evanston,
IL, USA, early August, 2013 |
||
|
On 7 October 2001, the US Global War On Terror started and is still on with millions killed. The US terrorists, apart from now having lost the War On Terror overlooked one important matter: |
No structure or tower can be destroyed by gravity from above initiated by local structural failures up top caused, e.g. by a plane. It is also explained at 1.18.50 in DVD2 - a film about the 911 incident. In order to fool the public the US terrorists asked Hollywood to produce a movie showing the WTC towers being stricken by planes and collapsing (sic) progressively by gravity from top down, etc, that the terrorists then broadcasted 'live on TV' assisted by US media, when the complete WTC-complex was destroyed using explosives. As the rubble would reveal how the towers really were destroyed the area was fenced off and faked pictures of the rubble itself were also published. Many persons get very upset of the thought that all footage of the 9/11 NY WTC destructions are fake. These persons must like the Anders Björkman Challenge! The Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, is supporting the US terrorists and will not, after several contacts, review the below information. |
Photo by Thomas Nilsson - The above initiation of the destruction of WTC2 on 911, i.e. top part tilting and dropping, smoke and debris being ejected, etc., is not possible because structures cannot break down like that ... by gravity. The photo, incl. tree in front, building right, smoke glued to a tilting top in center, etc, is a fake (produced in Hollywood). Thomas Nilsson should be detained as a covered person! |
|
In the decade since the 9/11 attacks, the FBI's intelligence program has tripled in size, and FBI analysts work around the world-from the war zone in Afghanistan to the White House Situation Room covering up the Truth about 911. 
FBI agents trying to win the Anders Björkman Challenge However, a simple fact remains: No structure or tower can be destroyed by gravity from top down initiated by local structural failures up top, i.e. that the weak top crushes the strong bottom. |
The above picture has been made by a scientist suggesting weak tops of any structure crushes the bottoms of same structure keeping the tops up. This person should be detained as a covered person! |
|
The FBI has failed the Anders Björkman Challenge 1. Dave
Thomas of NMSR,
Albuquerque, NM, a dull desert town which looks
bankrupt, thought he could win the Challenge
after I made a presentation
there
but failed completely and miserably. Dave
thinks that dropping one bag C of rice on a
kitchen scale (WTC) or on 9 bags A of rice
will crush the scale (WTC) or the 9 bags A
of rice, while the bag C, evidently, just
bounced on the scale or on the 9 bags A,
because the scale or A applied exactly the
same impact force on the bag C
of rice that the bag C of rice applied on
the scale or A, when impact
contact occurred. Dave
does not understand that the impact
force is of very short duration and the
energy content is only that of the
released potential energy that cannot even buckle
the top of a kitchen scale or demolish a grain of
rice in a bag of rice. What
happens is that the impact force is
transmitted to ground, while the scale/structure in
between is elastically compressed. An identical
impact force is applied to the moving
top (or bag of rice) that is likewise elastically
compressed (actually friction between the rice
corns absorbs all the energy) during the short
duration of the impact. Dave
shows in the second part of his paper an animation
of one WTC tower destruction, where the tower
itself is erased manually and smoke and debris are
added - it look like a fountain. It is a simple
trick film prepared in advance to be broadcast
live on TV to brainwash the US
population that believes anything shown on TV. The
towers were in the meantime destroyed from bottom
up. I have asked Dave several times to drop a bag C of rice on 9 bags A of rice to destroy the nine bags A of rice and invite media to have a look but ... John Geohegan also of NMSR thinks one mass impacting one, two, three masses attached to a rod is the solution but forgets that the rod and the masses remain intact. Only some tooth picks broke. The Anders Björkman Challenge 1 has been open since March 2010 and there is still - February 2016 - 55 months and 40.000+ downloads of this page later - no successful Challenger/structure! The prize is € 1 000 000:-. Come on terrorists and salary slaves! And why not US President B. Obama himself. Show that you are really smart and can destroy strong skyscrapers and similar structures by flying light aluminium planes into the tops of steel and concrete. Do not try to fool me with fake animations 'live on TV'! And do not tell me that USA (1st May 2011) killed a man that did it 9+ years ago! Prove it in a legal court and do not kill people without trial. Both Obama and Osama have failed the Anders Björkman Challenge 1! The terrorists are still free and around in USA to attack again. While FBI sleeps. The Anders Björkman Challenge 2 about a trip in space with humans aboard is described at the bottom of the page.
The Anders Björkman Challenge 1 is very simple! You are requested to describe a
structure where a small top part
C
can crush the much bigger bottom part A from
above, when top part
C
is dropped by gravity on
bottom part A. The structure with
parts C and A can look like the
structure right or below, e.g.
a
square block of any material/elements
(e.g. steel or wood
floors and pillars or whatever) connected together
plus plenty of air between the elements! All
elements and joints of the structure must evidently
be weak and break easily! The total
structure can have any mass or density, e.g.
density 0.25 (kg/cm3) or 250
(kg/m3), i.e. light, like the
WTC
towers that were
mostly air ... like a bale of cotton. The top part C is the
1/10th top of the total structure! It has mass M
kilograms (kg)! M can be 1 kg or 100 000 000 kg! It
does not matter. The drop height is max 3.7
meters! The bottom part A is the
9/10th bottom of the total structure. It has mass 9
M kilograms. It means A is 9 times bigger than
C! When top part C with mass M
impacts bottom part A from above after a free fall
drop of 3.7 meters by gravity (g = 9.82 m/s²),
it applies 36.334 M Joule energy to the (total)
structure with mass 10 M. Will bottom part A with mass
9 M be crushed into rubble by top part C with mass
M? Can 3.63 Joule energy initiate a collapse
destruction of 1 kilogram of A? That's the Challenge!
The Anders Björkman Challenge!
According US authorities incl. US presidents of all
kinds, security advisors, agencies, experts,
universities and plenty idiots of all types it
happens all the time! Little weak, top C
(with density 0.25) crushes big strong,
bottom A (with same density 0.25), i.e. the
one layer C top part crushes,
POUFF,
POUFF, the
nine layers of bottom A, one after the other, into
rubble (with density 1)! Left is seen a false top down
collapse as decribed in a video by Richard
Gage of A&E 911
Truth. The
top part
C is supposed to remain
intact when crushing
bottom
part A and it should not
produce silly smoke to hide what is
happening Richard Gage is right about the
fact that the images are 100% fake but he is wrong
about the suggestion that airplanes piloted by
Arabs started the fires in the tops of the
skyscrapers. All footage of WTC1/2 on fire on 911
with people running around in the streets below is
a pre-recorded Hollywood movie broadcast live on TV
on 11 September 2001. So bear this in mind when trying
to win my Challenge. Ten Tips how to win the
Anders Björkman Challenge 1! 1. Here
is explained in detail how two identical structures
collapsed from top down, i.e. how two towers
suddenly collapsed from top following the initial
impact of the top on the bottom. Just copy/paste
the structure and ideas, do and film the collapse
and you win €1 000 000:- . 2. Here
is a propaganda video with various 'experts'
telling you why two towers at NY suddenly became
rubble ... from top down ... by gravity alone. Very
helpful in order to win the Anders Björkman
Challenge 1! 3. Here is another
idea
how to ensure a terrorist
(2.2.1.5) Progression of
Collapse from top down of a
structure: Note that only 2% of the
potential energy of the structure is stored
in the top part C and 98% in the bottom part
A and by releasing it, little top part
C can crush anything below, i.e. big, strong
bottom part A! Evidently there is no
relationship between stored potential energy
and the energy required to rip apart structural
elements, but anyway ... . It is typical
terrorist slur! But try it anyway and you may win
€1 000 000:- . 5. Use flimsy bolts to connect the supporting elements as per Massachusetts Institute of Technology ideas! They break easy! 6. Or use the wikipedia system: In the case of both towers, the top section tilted towards the face that had buckled, behaving largely as a solid block separate from the rest of the building. It fell at least one story in freefall and impacted the lower sections with a force equivalent to over thirty times its own weight. This was sufficient to buckle the columns of the story immediately below it; the block then fell freely through the distance of another story. Total collapse was now unavoidable as the process repeated through the entire height of the lower sections. The force of each impact was also much greater than the horizontal momentum of the section (LOL), which kept the tilt from increasing significantly before the falling section reached the ground. It remained intact throughout the collapse, with its center of gravity within the building's footprint. After crushing the lower section of the building, it was itself crushed when it hit the ground. 7. Another way to design a structure where the top C can crush bottom A is evidently by not following the professional, expert advice in the February 2007 issue of Best Practices for Reducing the Potential for Progressive Collapse in Buildings (NISTIR 7396) by Bruce R. Ellingwood, Georgia Institute of Technology, Robert Smilowitz, Weidlinger Associates, Donald O. Dusenberry, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Dat Duthinh, H.S. Lew, National Institute of Standards and Technology Building and Fire Research Laboratory, Nicholas J. Carino, Consultant. None of the authors have won the Anders Björkman Challenge 1 though! Professional experts on progressive collapse cannot describe a structure that collapses progressively from top down by terrorist acts. You should wonder why experts like that support terrorism. 8. Use the software
of Applied
Element Method.com
that is dedicated to educating engineers about top
down progressive collapse, etc., and see what
happens when top C tries to crush bottom
A. 9. Or use the
Extreme
Loading® for
Structures (ELS)
software that allows structural engineers to
accurately analyze and visualize progressive
(disproportionate) collapse resulting from impact
loads by a top C from above on a structure
A! 10. Of course there are many
web
sites explaining
that it is perfectly normal that weak tops of steel
structures can crush the much stronger bottom parts
and their joints by gravity from top down. Such
web
sites are simply
made by terrorists! Use the info and try collect €
1M from the Anders Björkman Challenge
organizer! Terrorists use the effects of
progressive top down collapse to destroy
skyscrapers on 911 after flying planes into the
tops, you have seen live on TV! Amazing! A new (?)
phenomenom used for the first time in history by
terrorists surprised the US with its pants down!
And GWB was also sleeping! In charge of a
SUPERPOWER! Is it only a matter of the
joints of the load supporting elements? A joint
breaks up top (due fire) and releases elements that
break more joints that release more elements that
break many more joints, etc? A chain reaction
breaking joints from top down! But breaking joints
require energy! Can gravity provide it pulling down
top C? Why doesn't weak little top
part C just bounce on big strong bottom part
A instead of breaking joints or fall besides
part A? Wouldn't you expect THAT? It has
always happened before! 1 000 000+ times! 3.63 Joule
energy per kilogram structure is very little. Can
it break a joint? In order to crush such a structure you have to deform, buckle or break the members and break the connections and for that work has to be done and a short time impact force due to gravity from above - small top C dropping on big bottom A destroying bottom A from above - cannot do that work. It must be from bottom upp - top C being destroyed from below. The basic questions are of
course: Can a big, strong skyscraper,
e.g. WTC 1 or 2 at NY, collapse progressively from
top down to ground by gravity into rubble due to
local damages up top and create a Ground Zero as
indicated in figure left? a) Strange 'planes' hit
the weak tops C of skyscrapers and make
holes in them and put them on fire? b) Will top C suddenly
drop on intact bottom A? d) Will the big, intact,
undamaged bottom, much stronger parts A of
the skyscrapers below suddenly 'collapse'?
From top? Down? To ground? Twice on same
day? e) Will top C land on top
of the rubble of A? f) Will top C then ...
disappear?
xxxx
 It goes something like this according picture above. Steps 1 - 5 = top C crushes A (with density 0.25) from above into rubble B (with density 1) by gravity. And then, step 5, part C (with density 0.25) collides with rubble B (what is left of A) that is on ground = top C becomes more rubble B by gravity = step 7, when the rubble B forms a pyramide by gravity. Step 8 - mast falls off by gravity = only roof of top C remains on top of all rubble B = POUFF, POUFF, POUFF! Actually the roof of top C should now punch a square hole by gravity in the Earth's crust but for unknown reasons it doesn't happen. The Earth was too strong. As any child understands, the NIST explanation is criminal nonsense! First all elements deform elastically and, if anything breaks, it is always the supporting elements in top C that break first (as they are weaker in this case) and a smaller top part C (it has lost 1 m) may then drop 3.7 meters and produce a second collision, when smaller top part C is further damaged. This may continue until C is totally destroyed or just partially destroyed from below, i.e. when it cannot apply sufficient energy to produce more failures.
No structure of any kind collapses from top down! It is always from bottom up, top C is damaged in this example. So to win the Challenge 1 you have to come up with some other type of structure that really can collapse from top down! I look forward to that. I will happily pay you € 1 000 000:- if you can do that. I cannot find any structure in Universe that meets my Challenge 1 though. Reason is simple!
The Anders Björkman Challenge 2 (since September 2012) It seems that the Review of United States Human Space Flight Plans Committee (also known as the HSF Committee, Augustine Commission or Augustine Committee) believes that human space travel is easy: The Committee has concluded that, "the ultimate goal of human exploration is to chart a path for human expansion into the solar system." It also observed that "destinations should derive from goals," and "human spaceflight objectives should broadly align with key national objectives." Destinations beyond low Earth orbit that were considered by the Committee include the Moon, Mars, and near-Earth objects as well as the moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos. Among these, the Committee felt that "Mars stands prominently above all other opportunities for exploration" because "if humans are ever to live for long periods on another planetary surface, it is likely to be on Mars." The review was commissioned to take into account several objectives but not if human space travel is possible at all. In order to assist with the latter possibility the Anders Björkman Challenge 2 is first to calculate using basic astrophysical principles of space navigation and travel the amount of fuel (or energy) required to complete a manned Moon and/or planet Mars return trip from being ejected into space from orbit around Earth towards the Moon and/or planet Mars by external combustion chambers (also known as rockets), second to describe the space ship incl. its masses before/after the various manoeuvers of the trip, any heat shield(s), if fitted, the engines and fuel tanks that can carry the amount of fuel using 1960 or 2015 technology, the accommodation and gear for the persons aboard and finally/third to show that it is actually feasible to do the trip. Please do not present dreams and fantasies. An application should include, i.a.:- 1. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/altitude (m) of space ship/fuel in orbit around Earth (ready to go) and how it got there! 2. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of space ship/fuel after departure orbit Earth heading for location X in space and on to Moon/Mars + calculations (location X is where Moon/Mars gravity equals Earth gravity in space). 3. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of space ship/fuel prior arrival Moon/Mars + calculations. 4. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/altitude (m) of space ship/fuel in orbit around Moon/Mars - if applicable. 5. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s) of space ship module/fuel in orbit Moon/Mars and prior landing - if applicable. 6. Mass (kg) of space ship/fuel after landing Moon/Mars. 7. Mass (kg) of space ship/fuel prior departure Moon/Mars. 8. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/altitude (m) of space ship/fuel in orbit Moon/Mars prior departure to return Earth - if applicable. 9. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of space ship/fuel after departure orbit Moon heading for location X in space and on to Earth + calculations. 10. Trajectory - locations in space at regular intervals to confirm that you are heading in the right direction 11. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of space ship just prior re-entry Earth. 12. Trajectory of re-entry, incl. start location (position/altitude), directions in 3D, altitudes, velocities in 3D every minute from start to end (parachutes deployed). 13. Landing (details). Manoeuvres to leave/enter orbits and to land/depart must be explained in detail incl. locations/times, etc. John Olson, director of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate Integration Office said 2009 that it is easy to go to the Moon for a sustained human presence in space. It will be done 2020! Ask him to help you win my Challenge 2. The difficulties to get to Mars is explained by some silly science fiction writers here. Note that "with launch costs currently as high as $20 million per ton, boosting a Mars spacecraft would be prohibitively expensive", i.e. it is not possible at all. There are no way to get the spacecraft off the ground. Engineers from NASA, JPL, ESA, Harvard, MIT Astronautics department (!) and Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology are encouraged to participate in this Anders Björkman Challenge 2. You know, if Apollo 11 + third stage, mass 339 tons, could leave orbit around Earth 1969 and fly to the Moon and, if Apollo 11 CM, mass 5.5 tons, after the Moon trip could land on Earth, you could just copy/paste these accomplishments of burning fuel and leaving scrap - mass 333.5 tons - behind in space and associated technology and win a €1.000.000:- cheque! Do it. Money is evidently available. Tips about the matter are found at the Anders Björkman Moon/Mars Travel website. Any real description of a spacecraft that can accomplish a manned Moon and/or planet Mars return trip is part of winning my €1 000 000:- cheque! It seems most manned space trips so far are ... silly jokes or hoaxes ... in disguise of national security. How to just land on any planet with atmosphere is described at document Returning from Space: Re-entry, i.e. instead of using a rocket engine/combustion chamber/fuel to brake required for a Moon landing, you use a little heat shield, friction and turbulent drag at small angle of entry to reduce mostly horizontal velocity, while gravity pulls you closer to ground at increasing vertical velocity. Try to use that info to explain your Mars/Earth landing 2015. Dr. Buzz Aldrin - famous cosmo clown from the 1960's and author of best selling 1963 thesis "Line-of-sight guidance techniques for manned orbital rendezvous" - is still around. Buy him a drink and ask him how he managed to get to the Moon and back. Good luck! The first person calculating the amount of fuel required to complete a human space trip and describing a space craft and the combustion chambers doing it wins € 1.000.000:-. Terrorists, Holocaust or Holodomor deniers and people having seen and flown in Flying Saucers and UFOs of all kind are also welcome to participate in order to confirm their actions/ideas/services! Send your entry (detailed calculations of fuel and descriptions of space craft) to Anders Björkman, 6 rue Victor Hugo, F 06 240 Beausoleil, France, anders.bjorkman@wanadoo.fr Money is evidently available.
|
|
|
