The € 1 000 000:- Anders Björkman Challenges 1 & 2
(previously the Heiwa Challenges - seriously proposed and paid for by Anders Björkman, M.Sc. also at Fakeboot)


About us


Contact info


Order books



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

Anders Björkman


Like all the great religions of the past, The Nutwork presents a choice to us all: believe our stories or live in doubt. While their stories seem rather silly to us, they give feelings of security and purpose to others. These stories are the gospel of the religion of normality, if you will. You cannot be normal if you don't believe in this gospel. You cannot function in society like your friends and family if you don't believe in this gospel. You can't just stop believing in the gospel of normality, because doing so would mean you have to find different answers to all the questions the gospel answered before. The gospel covers a massive emptiness in people. I can understand why people refuse to question it.

The RideNeverEnds

On 11 September 2016 it will be fifteen years since US terrorists destroyed the WTC-complex at New York 'live on (faked) TV' and blamed it, without evidence, on another party - Usama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

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.

Try to crush a kitchen scale (WTC) with the top of another kitchen scale (WTC) to start with ... and note that the top just bounces off the scale, as expected, unless the scale crushes the little top of the scale at impact.

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 ( Progression of Collapse from top down of a structure: 

"Construction of X resulted in the storage of more than 4x1011 joules of potential energy over the 1,368-foot height of the structure.

Of this, approximately 8x109 joules of potential energy (i.e. 2%) were stored in the upper part of the structure, above the impact floors, relative to the lowest point of impact. Once collapse initiated, much of this potential energy was rapidly converted into kinetic energy. As the large mass of the collapsing floors above accelerated and impacted on the floors below, it caused an immediate progressive series of floor failures, punching each in turn onto the floor below, accelerating as the sequence progressed (from top down)."  

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:- .

4. In a Discussion by Ronald H. Brookman, M.S., S.E. of "Analysis of Structural Response of WTC 7 to Fire and Sequential Failures Leading to Collapse" by Therese P. McAllister, Robert MacNeill, Omer Erbay, Andrew Sarawit, Mehdi Zarghamee, Steven Kirkpatrick and John Gross, in Journal of Structural Engineering, January 2012, Vol. 138, No. 1, there are many tips about completely destroying structures starting with one little failure. Maybe they will help you win the Anders Björkman Challenge 1? Therese P. McAllister, Robert MacNeill, Omer Erbay, Andrew Sarawit, Mehdi Zarghamee, Steven Kirkpatrick and John Gross, all of National Institute of Standards and Technology supporting terrorism, on the other hand have all failed to collect €1M from the Anders Björkman Challenge.

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 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?

Repetition - the Challenge is about any structure, any type of members, solid connections, any material, any scale, etc.

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?

It is assumed by US authorities and institutes of learning of many kinds and also by terrorists of other kind that a structure A will be crushed by gravity, if you drop a top piece C (C = 1/10th of A) of the same structure on A (after crashing an airplane into the top of A) and that it is quite normal - no conspiracy - that pieces fall down below, etc, etc and that nothing remains at the end except a heap of rubble. So here is
The Anders Björkman Challenge 1

(March 2010)


1. The structure volume is supposed to have a certain uniform cross area (meter²) and height h (meter) and is fixed on the ground. The structure consists of an assembly of various connected elements inside the volume, e.g. columns (wall elements), beams (floor elements), brackets (to connect columns and beams), plates, etc, of any type or material joined together. It can be any size! The structure volume contains mostly air, of course. It can but need not look like the structure left (developed by NASA engineer Mackey)! It is VERY simple; 111 units of a horizontal beam/platform with mass m supported by/connected to two (or four ?) pillars (total 3 or 5 elements per unit) stacked/joined on top of each other (+ a mast on top). It looks like WTC1!! It also looks like a house of cards but note that the horizontal and vertical elements are connected with solid joints, so use weak supporting, vertical elements of fragile material (and more solid, heavy horizontal ones).

2. The structure should be more or less identical from height = 0 (ground) to height = H (top), e.g. uniform density, layout of internal elements, weights and joints, etc. Horizontal elements in structure should be identical. Vertical, load carrying elements should be similar and be uniformly stressed due to gravity, i.e. bottom vertical elements should be reinforced or made a little stronger, as required. Connections between similar elements should be similar throughout. In example left H = 111 h, where h is height of one unit.

3. The structure should be uniformly stressed at height=0 and height = H. It means that supporting elements are stronger at height=0.

4. Before drop test (see 8.) the structure shall be stable, i.e. carry itself and withstand a small lateral impact at top without falling apart and to deflect elastically sideways less than H/100 at the top. Connections or joints between elements cannot rely solely on friction.

5. Before drop test top 1/10th of the structure is disconnected at the top at height = 0.9 H without damaging the structure/elements/joints more than required for disconnection.

6. The lower structure, 0.9 H high is then called part A. The top part, 0.1 H high, is called part C.

7. Mass of part C should be <1/9th of mass of part A.

8. Now drop part C on part A and crush bottom part A of structure into smaller pieces by top part C of the structure (if you can! That's the test). Film the test on video!

9. Drop height of part C above part A is max 3.7 meter. Less drop height is permitted. Thus the maximum energy (Joule) applied at collision C/A to initiate the crush-down progressive collapse is mass of C times gravity acceleration 9.82 m/sec² (i.e. the force acting on C) times height 3.7 m (i.e. distance the force is displaced).

10. Structure is only considered crushed, when >70% of the elements in part A are disconnected from each other at the joints or broken between joints after test, i.e. drop by part C on A from 3.7 m. Try to use elements and/or joints not producing smoke/dust at failures, so we can see the crush down action and failures of elements/joints on video. If all supporting, vertical elements are broken in part A of structure left, then 66.66% of all elements are broken, etc, etc.

Have a try! I look forward to your structures and videos!

Once you have a clear idea of how the structure should fall, it's time to prepare the structure. The first step in preparation is to clear any loose items out of the structure. The second step is to remove all non-load-bearing elements within the structure. This makes for a cleaner break of elements and joints at every level. If these elements were left intact, they would stiffen the structure, hindering its collapse. You should also weaken the supporting elements and their joints, so that they give way more easily.


The first person describing a structure fulfilling conditions 1-10 above and doing a successful drop test wins Euro 1 000 000:-.

Terrorists, Holocaust deniers (and demolition companies) are also welcome to participate in order to confirm their actions/ideas/services!

Send your entry (description of structure + verified result of test/video) to Anders Björkman, 6 rue Victor Hugo, F 06 240 Beausoleil, France,

Money is evidently available in the bank.

Read also Björkman about WTC 7, WTC 1, POUFF POUFF and WTC. And JEM and Bazant Closure!

Right I have added fake photos of some structures progressively collapsing from top down that do not fulfill above conditions:

Photo right (I have added C and A) that you find on the Internet is often used to illustrate a crush down global collapse of a skyscraper that allegedly took place twice on 9-11. Many similar photos exist. It is suggested that a small, structurally weak top part C with a big mast, hidden by the smoke, has got loose due to fire/local failures (plane making hole!) below C and is dropping down by gravity on the much bigger,stronger and intact structural bottom part A and that dust, debris - thousands of small pieces - and big, loose steel wall panels are ejected sideways in all directions and smoke is pushed upwards as a result, while bottom part A is crushed down into rubble B, also hidden by smoke. The picture, like all similar pictures or videos, is a fake! It is just a stupid animation created by terrorists using Photoshop or Blast Code or similar! The top part is simply erased and smoke (from a volcano!), dust and debris added Hollywood style in different layers - live on TV!

Easy to show and prove. The picture is really ridiculous.

I wonder why any US terrorism analysts like FBI cannot see that! Can't they distinguish a fake photo from a real one? I pay anybody €1 000 000:- to produce a real photo or video of a structure collapsing from the top!

Below are two more faked photos of the WTC destructions: You wonder why a big wall panel falling on side always is followed by a trail of smoke/dust. And why the smoke on top looks the same!

Small top C crushing big bottom A = ridiculous! Prove me wrong and win €1.000.000:- - (Note - photo is a fake! Smoke and debris are false.)

Why does weak, light top part C dropping by gravity produce smoke and dust, when crushing stronger, heavier, intact part A below into rubble B? What type of structure is part A that just becomes smoke and dust?


Upper small part C crushing big A = ridiculous! Prove me wrong and win €1.000.000:- (Note - photos are faked! WTC1 and adjacent building are computer generated images and smoke and debris are just added by Photoshop.)

Answer: What you see on pictures and videos of the destruction is not top C destroying bottom A but an animation with copy/paste of various layers of smoke, dust, removed tower parts, etc! It is fantasy, Hollywood style, comics destruction. It is quite easy to produce in a photo lab!

To assist anybody to spot a trick, animated, US (propaganda) film you are invited to watch this. On a sunny day (1953?) a number of US warships are gathered at sea around a spot - ground zero! - to watch an atomic, nuclear bomb going off ... which happens suddenly: 50 kg of Uranium-235 is in very short time, nanoseconds, transformed into pure energy corresponding to 10 000 ton of TNT we are supposed to believe: the atmosphere is heated to 100 000°C and compressed to 100 000 bar producing a heat/pressure wave (apart from a dirty mushroom cloud) that progresses at 3 000 km/h! But the few clouds in the sky and the 10+ ships on the water are not affected at all !!! - reason being that the 'explosion' is fake - an early Hollywood animation.

Here is a plane colliding with WTC2. But in five different ways as shown live on TV! Poor animations!

Right is another photo of similar type, i.e. a fake (from the NIST reports) showing steel wall panels and debris falling from the top of the South Tower, WTC2, while the bottom part of WTC2 in the background is still intact. At the bottom of the photo you see a panel C that has been ripped off from 7-8 floors and adjacent walls and then rotated 90° while falling down.

The picture is evidently a fake! It is just another stupid animation created by same terrorists and Photoshop! And dishonest photographers. Terrorists!

Imagine - there is a small fire up top in a skyscraper and suddenly the four solid perimeter walls - steel panels - are ripped off six floors apart, i.e. at two locations top/bottom and are pushed out and then fall down on the streets below followed by clouds of dust and a photographer (terrorist?) snaps a picture of it - just when the panels pass by ... while the bottom of the skyscraper is still intact!

Unbelievable in my view! It is of course impossible to snap such a picture. But there are people making fake pictures. They are of course terrorists! And FBI or any US authority does nothing about it. Amazing. FBI does not react!

Big parts - steel wall panels - dropping from skyskraper = ridiculous! Prove me wrong and win €1.000.000:- (Note - photo is evidently a fake!)

It is not strange that an identical (or slightly 'repaired' (!) upper right corner) steel wall panel pops up on another photo right attributed to alcoholic photograper Richard Drew, AP.

Ten years later 2011 Richard Drew lives with his wife in NY and took a shoot at DSK. I like DSK. I do not like Richard Drew, AP. He cannot explain how he managed to snap a falling wall steel panel at 100 mph. Has he a drinking problem?

Now the steel wall panel drops on the Marriott hotel in downtown NY and panel C shown above has disappeared! But it is just amateurish Photoshop! Like all terrorist photos of the 'collapses'. A skyscraper can only get destroyed from bottom up! A skyscraper can never collapse from top down!

Why is described below!

A false FEM description of a structural collapse is shown here. US authorities and terrorists believe that structural components like beams are just ripped apart ... by gravity ... and fly away! Sorry GWB and Condi - you do not fool me!

Bill Biggart is another photographer producing pictures, e.g. this (plane collides with WTC2) or this (debris and panels fall from WTC2).

Same part, repaired (sic), dropping from skyskraper on hotel = ridiculous! Prove me wrong and win €1.000.000:- (Note - photo is faked = photoshopped by Richard Drew, AP)

Another (faked!) photo, right, of a dropping wall panel of WTC2 is from a
fake video by Christian Martin, NBC:

Doesn't people know that walls are not falling off tops of buildings and that filming such non-events is suspicious?

How a skyscraper destroys itself from top down (!) is described by US terrorists in Chapter 9 of NIST Report 1-6 ( .

Every essential piece of information in that report is of course false. Imagine that! A US agency, NIST, publishes a report how a skyscraper destroys itself from top on 9-11 and everything is faked! NIST supports terrorism!

Doesn't the authors of the report know that no structure can destroy itself from top down by gravity? And why illustrate the report with fake photos of falling wall panels? Of course, it fools plenty of people but not the real experts.

If you believe above pictures/terrorists show reality, you have no problem to win Euro 1 000 000:-. Just read on!

Big part, ripped off wall panel again, dropping from skyscraper = ridiculous! Prove me wrong and win €1.000.000:- (Note - video is stupidly faked by Christian Martin, NBC!)

Why the above structure does not meet the Anders Björkman Challenge 1

In above structure a mass of 14 connected masses m (top C) drops 3.7 meters and applies 508.7m Joule energy to structural parts C and A at the impact. A and C evidently deform elastically at impact and, if A and C can absorb 508.7m Joule energy, nothing more happens - only elastic deformation (a bounce + arrest) takes place.

As the 508.7m Joule energy is split and absorbed 50/50 between C and A at contact and, because C is much smaller than A and therefore can elastically absorb much less energy than A, the result is always that C cannot apply energy on A without destroying itself first, if the energy applied was sufficiently large in the first place.

Furthermore, the initial impact cannot release more energy to maintain the crush-down process, i.e. one-way crush-down progressive collapse is not possible!

If 508.7m Joule energy cannot be absorbed elastically, one or more elements/joints will first deform plastically and then break apart. Part of the Challenge is to identify what elements/joints of the structure break first; is it (1) the top supporting elements of floor #97 of part A or (2) the bottom supporting elements of floor #99 in part C or some other supporting elements? Maybe (3) elements supporting floor #1 of part A break first? Or (4) some other elements? Maybe the mast will fall off?

NIST suggests without evidence that (1) the top supporting elements of floor #97 of part A break and that floor #97 fuses with and accelerates with top part C (requires energy) and that now 15 m drops 3.7 meters and applies 545.0m Joule energy on floor #96 of part A. Again at this second collision both C and A absorb energy elastically and if there is surplus energy some elements may break. NIST suggests again, without any evidence that it is the elements below floor #96 that break and that floor #96 fuses with floor #97 and is accelerated by top part C and floor #97. And so on another 95 times! It takes 12 seconds! Part A is destroyed by gravity according NIST: part A could not absorb the energy applied from above by part C so global collapse ensued.

After small top C has crushed big bottom A we are told that the result looks like above a few days later with smoke still pouring out. The bottom parts of the south and west walls of WTC2 are still standing with some wall panels debris inside (?) but no sight of 100+ floors stacked on top of each other also inside (! which you would expect).

The photo is a fake to impress people with images of the bottom parts of the walls still standing, etc. I assume the real debris was a heap of floors showing that the towers were destroyed from bottom up in a controlled demolition manner

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,

Money is evidently available.


Anders Björkman


The 911-report and the CIA Torture report written by members of the U.S. Congress can be read free of charge on the net. I review the reports here where you also can download the reports. Interesting reading. One President of the U.S. encouraged the CIA to use torture to find out how terrorists are brainwashed and another President of the U.S. ordered the terrorist to be murdered!

Heiwa Co home page