-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Palmquist <rpalmq@prodigy.net>
To: Truth Radio <truthradio@truthradio.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 8:13 AM
Subject: Question for physicists

why did buildings constructed to withstand the impact of an airliner respond September 11, with total destruction? Why did they fail to stand against the impacts of those planes?

Fact: audio frequencies have been known to shatter glass.

Question: why did the concrete and steel once destabilized not turn to chunks instead of most of it becoming dust?

Observation: there were TWO buildings, each responding as a separate "tuning fork." The impact of the planes hitting the structures would each have set up differing audio responses to the crashes within the structural steel of each of the buildings. If those respective audio frequencies generated by each of the crashes just happened to interact to create a secondary phase-beat, that third audio frequency could have "just happened" to have been at the frequency that would pulverize glass and concrete.

Forensic question: knowing that the pilot who hit the Pentagon needed expert training to hit his target at precisely the most destructive level above ground, were the pilots who hit the twin towers required to hit the exact floors they impacted? If so, was there a structural/audio engineer behind this tragedy intelligent enough to design the exact negative audio response interaction between the two buildings purposely to bring down the towers?

If an audio reaction is responsible for reducing the buildings to dust, this would explain why the second building hit was the first to crumble. The reason would be that the destructive audio frequency would have been aided in its negative effect in the second building hit by the fact that its structural steel core was hit at a lower level. That core was hit low enough to create a much greater weight above the melted steel, sufficient to speed the reaction in that structure. The negative audio wave, remaining after the first building crumbled, took more time to work its destruction upon the greater mass of the first building hit. A proof of this theory could be established by examining the material formerly in the floors above each of the impacts. If that material came down more likely in chunks than in dust, the audio explanation for the destruction might be shown to be valid. The point would be that the material above the melt point would have been destroyed mainly as a function of gravity, whereas the material below the core melt would have been pulverized by the audio reaction. The first building to go had less material below the melt point, causing the audio reaction to work faster in it than in the other building, and leaving perhaps more large portions from the upper floors in its wreckage.

This email has been written by:
Richard Palmquist
To have your email address added to or removed from my list, contact me at:
246 La Camarilla Place
Nipomo, CA 93444
Listen: www.truthradio.com,
Member: Amer. Media Assn - www.americanmedia.org
Our son Tim's web site - www.glorifyjesus.com
Our son Stephen's web site - http://arts.hkbu.edu.hk/~spalmquist/srp/quotes.html