if the force on top is an entire building, and the force below is the reaction, and the beam has been heated to 1500-odd degrees

it'll ***bend***

now if that's every single beam on three floors

there's gonna be ***a little bit*** of a problem

1500 or so odd degrees you say>

let me go fucking check for you, you faggot

https://navysustainability.dodlive.mil/files/2010/04/MIL-DTL-5624-REV-V.pdf

Jet fuel can't melt stupid cancerous conversations about 9/11.

Inb4 twin towers was built with plastic

Exhibit A. Spec describing temp at which standard jet fuel is capable of burning

"Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F"

lol. Discuss in voice chat so we can hear your autism.

oki so it was F not C

whatever

as well as number of BTUs such a fire is capable of expending

the point is that it's hot enough for the beams to be weakened

yes, correct. it is not

Wut

Even I know that's stupid

no more so than if there was a cat-3 hurriucane that day

Any fucking heat weakens metal

and the specs show it was designed to acoomidate cat-5 winds

i said hot enough, not "not enough" you nigger

Why don't we try to recreate it properly

i.e. on a windy day the top of such a building would see FAR more strain than any fire could every hope to provide

why don't we accept that intense heat weakens metal

FIRE

Why don't we let these two lovebirds fuck it out of each other.

DOESN'T CAUSE STRAIN

IT REDUCES THE STEEL'S TOLERANCE FOR STRAIN

strain is lateral loading

yea

please review your finite element analysis

there was lateral loading when the building leaned

Lol not even steel

static, not dynamic

fucking

Bet it was made like grenfell

building bends

so you are saying that the middle was the impact site?