As I've mentioned before I've seen this same model used by the likes of AE911 to support their arguments. In my own opinion it's too "low" a tower in terms of stories to offer any real insight into the question of how the collapses could progress so rapidly and steadily through so many floors, despite very different initiation points.
There's very little actual discussion going on over there. But I'm curious as to why they feature my simplistic illustrative models, and yet ignore Kai Kostack's much more impressive model from six years ago.
Thank you. But @aka is infinitely more suitable as should be wholly obvious -- I don't have the kind of interest that would support a whole subreddit dedicated entirely to just this question.
However I don't expect @aka to conduct discussion here because of the way his posts were moderated last time he was around, so I think that keeping discussion in the sub is much more sensible.
As you will have seen if you've visited the sub, though, he's very grateful for the modelling effort you've put in (as am I).
I'm waiting for the global collapse of a taller tower model before I cough up the $100, at your suggestion.You are also, I think, not the type to fall silent when you finally realize that the towers might actually have collapsed by the floors being stripped from the columns which then failed in part due to slender column buckling at the joints.
In general though, I have a young family and a demanding job among other things, and these questions don't obsess me -- much as I have a real interest in them. So there will always be times when I don't check in here for extended periods. I get a bit tired of smug/ad hominem remarks typified by NoParty's and Jeffrey's comments upthread, and then when I'm banned for the nth time I tend to lose interest in Metabunk for long after my ban expires.
But don't worry -- I'm not going anywhere. This whole discussion may proceed more slowly than others for whatever reason, but I'm not leaving it!