JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags wtc , beam weapon , 911 conspiracy theory , 911

Reply
Old 8th February 2007, 09:10 AM   #1
DontAskMe
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 37
Directed Energy Weapons ??

I have been advised that these absolutely do exist, I have never heard of them, google isnt any help...

Can someone explain what this is, or more accurately, do they exist and if not how do I explain that with credible links, etc. ??
DontAskMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 09:16 AM   #2
Totovader
Game Warden
 
Totovader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 2,240
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
I have been advised that these absolutely do exist, I have never heard of them, google isnt any help...

Can someone explain what this is, or more accurately, do they exist and if not how do I explain that with credible links, etc. ??
Depends on what you're talking about. "Directed energy" is quite ambiguous. I remember reading that we do have such tools based on some of the ideas that Tesla came up with, for things like small medical applications, etc- but as for the big space weapons/air squadron destroyers... no.

I also remember reading an article responding to some of the weather manufacturing claims that point out that the 2nd law of thermodynamics shows that such things cannot exist in reality. I'm no physics major, though.
Totovader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 09:22 AM   #3
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Arkan_Wolfshade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Making Mytheon come to life
Posts: 7,158
At a high level, would not a laser be a "directed energy weapon"? The issue with these wrt WTC is that power needed to be effective on the scale, and at the distances necessary, is prohibitive.
__________________
Amy: You should try homeopathic medicine, Bender. Try some zinc.
Bender: I am forty percent zinc.
Amy: Then take some echinacea, or St. John's Wort.
Professor: Or a big fat placebo. It's all the same crap.
Arkan_Wolfshade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 09:30 AM   #4
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Posts: 23,199
Yes, things like the Airborne Laser are "directed energy" weapons. They exist, and function, but they can't do most of the fantastic stuff that some people claim they can.

And anything that mentions HAARP or weather control is just insane, and should probably be discounted automatically.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 09:37 AM   #5
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Dark Side of the Sun
Posts: 7,482
Originally Posted by Totovader View Post
Depends on what you're talking about. "Directed energy" is quite ambiguous.
even the term "energy" is rather vague

sonic weapons are "directed energy"
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 09:43 AM   #6
c4ts
Philosopher
 
c4ts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Your base
Posts: 8,427
What about rifles? Don't they direct kinetic energy?
__________________
Ha ha ha ha....

Stupid signature size limit.
c4ts is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 09:56 AM   #7
ConspiRaider
Writer of Nothingnesses
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,169
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
I have been advised that these absolutely do exist, I have never heard of them, google isnt any help...

Can someone explain what this is, or more accurately, do they exist and if not how do I explain that with credible links, etc. ??
Broaden your search to "Particle Beam Weapons". You'll get the skinny on endoatmospheric, exoatmospheric and the phone book on anti-missile defense.

The twoofers seem to think that if this type of weaponry has been wished for, or researched, or funded, or lab-tested in smaller scale or whatnot - then they HAVE to be considered as a plausible explanation for destruction of the WTC complex. I had one twoofer try to explain, in twooferly fashion, that these giant beam weapons were "hidden" amongst all the orbiting space junk. Twoofers will say anything to avoid admitting that they are dead wrong.
ConspiRaider is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 10:03 AM   #8
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 13,116
I used to direct energy beam weapons. They are such prima donnas, though, always wanting to have the spotlight!

That's why I switched to producer. Less stress.
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 10:10 AM   #9
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: I beedunk 40 miles from the border
Posts: 13,210
The latest 'theory' about directed beam weapons being used to bring the towers and WTC 7 down was put forth by Woods and Reynolds.

Last I looked at their webpage devoted to this they had not even bothered to give any niggling little technical details such as the type of 'beam', laser or particle, let alone come up with a frequency of a laser or type of particle that could affect steel and concrete in the manner that they characterize was occuring on 9/11/01, nor had they calculated the power output of such a device(if 100% efficient it would have to equal the power required to do what they characterize as occuring on 9/11/01) or what power source could be ustilized to run the weapon.

In other words the whole thing is no better than anything Gene Roddenberry came up with for the various "Star Trek" series', it all fantasy.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 10:11 AM   #10
Pardalis
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montréal
Posts: 25,831
Directed energy beams? Yeah, sure, I've seen them being used.

Just ask this guy.
Pardalis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 10:12 AM   #11
ConspiRaider
Writer of Nothingnesses
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,169
Originally Posted by JimBenArm View Post
I used to direct energy beam weapons. They are such prima donnas, though, always wanting to have the spotlight!

That's why I switched to producer. Less stress.
I hear ya. They still tell that story on the Warner Brothers lot when you were directing "You Can Call Me Ray". Remember? The beam weapon went into its trailer for the meal break, then wouldn't come out until its trailer interior was decorated in mauve and teal color tones. Because they reminded it of its home planet.

So cool how you got it to come out. Remember you got a bunch of extras to gather in the commissary parking lot? They all were wearing mauve and teal T-shirts with "9/11 Was An Inside Job" on them. Beamo busted open the trailer door quicker than you could say "Pull it!", and you were able to get the shot. Oh, do the boys laugh and love telling that one at WB...
ConspiRaider is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 10:13 AM   #12
JonnyFive
Insurance Underwriter of Doom
 
JonnyFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by c4ts View Post
What about rifles? Don't they direct kinetic energy?
Taking this to the next level, a plane flown into a building is a weapon used to direct kinetic energy as well.

Oh my god, the towers were destroyed by directed energy weapons!

Holy s**t!
__________________
"If you drink virus water ,i must say ‘don't drink it,it is trap’." -Emre_1974tr

Ex-defendant in Simpson v. Randi, et al.
JonnyFive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 10:17 AM   #13
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 13,116
Originally Posted by JonnyFive View Post
Taking this to the next level, a plane flown into a building is a weapon used to direct kinetic energy as well.

Oh my god, the towers were destroyed by directed energy weapons!

Holy s**t!
You left out "Conspiracy!!!!!11111!11"
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 11:03 AM   #14
JonnyFive
Insurance Underwriter of Doom
 
JonnyFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by JimBenArm View Post
You left out "Conspiracy!!!!!11111!11"
More exclamation points means more truth.

I mean, Truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
"If you drink virus water ,i must say ‘don't drink it,it is trap’." -Emre_1974tr

Ex-defendant in Simpson v. Randi, et al.
JonnyFive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 11:43 AM   #15
Crazycowbob
Bovine Overlord
 
Crazycowbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Posts: 1,387
Beam weapons do exist, and are a whooole lotta fun
Of course, what the truthers propose is more than a little outlandish, something to that scale and power would be rediculously inefficient, if not impossible to produce with current technology.

But still, as I said, existing one's can be a lot of fun! I'm thinking about building one of these to play with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolaser
__________________
"Pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space,
'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth." Eric Idle, The Meaning of Life
Crazycowbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 11:43 AM   #16
burnvictim77
Critical Thinker
 
burnvictim77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 270
Hey Guys???

What's with all the questions. Judy Wood said of the beam weapon, "I don't think we even have to define it." So, can't you just stick to one topic for an entire sentence?

Clearly, a beam or ray of energy or particles (or perhaps, paradoxically, both) turned the top of the world trade center into a giant snowball, and sucked the 'dustified' steel into the upper atmosphere. Clearly, as show in one still photograph. No debris fell that day.
burnvictim77 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 12:24 PM   #17
DontAskMe
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 37
OK, thanks...now I see, since it cant be proven they dont exist, they must exist for their purpose
DontAskMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 01:01 PM   #18
Mr. Skinny
Alien Cryogenic Engineer
 
Mr. Skinny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 8,192
I assume they exist, seeing as the USAF has a Directed Energy Directorate as part of the Air Force Research Laboratory.

http://www.de.afrl.af.mil
__________________
U.S.L.S 1969-1975
"thanks skinny. And bite me. :-) - The Bad Astronomer, 11/15/02 on Paltalk
"He's harmless in a rather dorky way." - Katana
"Deities do not organize, they command." - Hokulele
Mr. Skinny is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 01:03 PM   #19
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Arkan_Wolfshade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Making Mytheon come to life
Posts: 7,158
Originally Posted by burnvictim77 View Post
Hey Guys???

What's with all the questions. Judy Wood said of the beam weapon, "I don't think we even have to define it." So, can't you just stick to one topic for an entire sentence?

Clearly, a beam or ray of energy or particles (or perhaps, paradoxically, both) turned the top of the world trade center into a giant snowball, and sucked the 'dustified' steel into the upper atmosphere. Clearly, as show in one still photograph. No debris fell that day.
<LtCG>
N'I don' care who y'ar; that's funny raight thar.
</LtCG>
__________________
Amy: You should try homeopathic medicine, Bender. Try some zinc.
Bender: I am forty percent zinc.
Amy: Then take some echinacea, or St. John's Wort.
Professor: Or a big fat placebo. It's all the same crap.
Arkan_Wolfshade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 01:05 PM   #20
Alareth
Expert Expertologist
 
Alareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,402
Directed Energy weapons do exist. It's a verifiable fact. They can be found in any number of laboratories as small prototypes.

I want one of those new Navy railguns.
__________________
Pixelated Reality | Alareth Does Art!

Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak
Alareth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 01:07 PM   #21
Psi Baba
Homo Skepticalis
 
Psi Baba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Occupying my barstool
Posts: 3,372
Directed energy weapons? Hell, they've been around since the late 1950s/early 1960s. Sheesh, have none of you ever seen a Godzilla movie?
__________________
Save Caribbean Rum! (seriously)
Psi Baba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 01:11 PM   #22
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 21,383
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
OK, thanks...now I see, since it cant be proven they dont exist, they must exist for their purpose
No Beam Weapon could make the WTC collapse on 9/11.

Judy Wood is insane. You can tell by her interview she has not even run the numbers.

Yes we have shot down missiles with a laser. The best we could do is burn a window made of the correct material with a laser lab in a plane.

So is a window going to destry the WTC?

But Judy Wood's ideas on the beam weapon prove her a nut. She can not even get momentum correct how can she get a beam weapon right; she will not even do the energy required to do her story.

If you believe in beam weapons being used on 9/11 to bring down the WTC, you have may have mental problems. See a doctor now.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 01:17 PM   #23
JonnyFive
Insurance Underwriter of Doom
 
JonnyFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,473
Originally Posted by beachnut View Post
Judy Wood is insane. You can tell by her interview she has not even run the numbers.
But... she had that diagram... billiard balls... Keebler Elves... trees... towers fell... trees don't fall... billiard balls... diagram... Keebler tree... but... but...

She seems so rational before you hear her talk, read her writing, or know anything about her or any of her theories, beliefs, or role in the Truth Movement!
__________________
"If you drink virus water ,i must say ‘don't drink it,it is trap’." -Emre_1974tr

Ex-defendant in Simpson v. Randi, et al.
JonnyFive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 02:02 PM   #24
DontAskMe
Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 37
the latest No significant debris pile means bldgs brought down by dew, plus all the cylindrical holes in the debris

are these people serious? how do I respond to something like that
DontAskMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 02:10 PM   #25
rwguinn
Philosopher
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 9,005
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
the latest No significant debris pile means bldgs brought down by dew, plus all the cylindrical holes in the debris

are these people serious? how do I respond to something like that
Sigh....It's been done. There are pictures everywhere of the huge debris piles (manyof them here--use the search function)
There was even a discussion/rant on the "round holes" some where around here.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 02:11 PM   #26
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In the argyle
Posts: 17,137
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
the latest No significant debris pile means bldgs brought down by dew, plus all the cylindrical holes in the debris

are these people serious? how do I respond to something like that
With the international "cuckoo" sign, of course.
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard

What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 02:21 PM   #27
baron
Graduate Poster
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hill
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
I have been advised that these absolutely do exist, I have never heard of them, google isnt any help...

Can someone explain what this is, or more accurately, do they exist and if not how do I explain that with credible links, etc. ??
Ah, you mean one of these?

http://www.cheniere.org/books/part1/teslaweapons.htm

Devilish good fun
__________________

baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 02:37 PM   #28
Lynx2174
Critical Thinker
 
Lynx2174's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: California
Posts: 250
I thought that this was going to be about those people who think that some nebulous conspirators are causing them physical pain/sickness or beaming thoughts into thier heads, etc with directed microwave ray beams.

Though this isn't any less crazy, by any measure.

The US has several types of Directed energy weapons, mostly in development. Just recently, a nonleathal microwave weapon for mounting on humvees, etc was declared ready. Lockeed-Martin has opened a factory for producing solid-state lasers for testing.

None of them output more than the single digit megawatts, which is of course quite a bit, but certainly not the building smashing GDI ion cannon ray gun that these loons seem to be imagining. They could certainly ruin a missile or mortar shell's day though.
__________________
Fight apathy or dont.

This isn't *********** rocket surgery.
Lynx2174 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 02:47 PM   #29
hellaeon
Graduate Poster
 
hellaeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: City of Burning Churches, Australia
Posts: 1,493
Raytheon Company in the US recently made public a new 'heat' weapon for use in the 'battlefield' (any kind of enforcement), called the 'Silent Guardian', it directs an 'energy beam' (hahaha love that loose term usage) in the form of heat.
For the people over the hill getting zapped by it, its like being exposed to an oven.

http://www.raytheon.com/products/silent_guardian/

Edit: I think lynx was referring to this
__________________
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. - Carl Sagan
I don't exactly have a Phd in physics. I have something much better. Common sense. - pagan
How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years? It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes. - Irony, MirageMemories style
hellaeon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 03:52 PM   #30
jhunter1163
Beer-swilling semiliterate
Moderator
 
jhunter1163's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Room 118, Bohemian Grove Marriott
Posts: 19,804
IIRC, R.Mackey did some calculations and came up with figures for the amount of energy that would be needed to power such a weapon. This exceeded the power available from various sources (he listed them) by a factor of a million or so.

R. Mackey is my hero. I wonder if he could hook me up with Lisa Nowak.

ETA: For Christ's sake, I'm kidding about the Nowak thing.
jhunter1163 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 04:11 PM   #31
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 13,116
Originally Posted by jhunter1163 View Post

ETA: For Christ's sake, I'm kidding about the Nowak thing.
Too late! She's coming for you now!
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 05:22 PM   #32
maccy
Dalek-Reptilian Hybrid
 
maccy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 2,094
Originally Posted by jhunter1163 View Post
IIRC, R.Mackey did some calculations and came up with figures for the amount of energy that would be needed to power such a weapon. This exceeded the power available from various sources (he listed them) by a factor of a million or so.

R. Mackey is my hero. I wonder if he could hook me up with Lisa Nowak.

ETA: For Christ's sake, I'm kidding about the Nowak thing.
This is the post:

Originally Posted by R.Mackey View Post
A mathematician will be quick to point out that any arbitrary surface can be described by a collection of "circles" ("balls," we used to call them) of arbitrary diameter. Unless you can find a single size that fits perfectly, which you can't, you've proven nothing that geometrists haven't known for centuries.

Anyway -- seems we're still thinking about those pesky beam weapons, despite having shown you much less sinister mechanisms that provide the same "round holes," and are in fact completely consistent with the expected building performance. We've also shown you how your Star Wars weapon actually doesn't fit the "evidence" that you (and only you) see.

Still, elsewhere, you've insisted that we treat this as a valid hypothesis. It must be tested, you say.

The test is simple: Do beam weapons of this magnitude exist? No.

Still doubting, eh?

In that case, class, pull up a chair. Today we're going to design our own WTC Killing Beam Weapon of Doom to see just what one would look like. While the beam emitter itself could plausibly be a "black" project, something the Governmint doesn't want us to see, it would be dependent on much more mundane technologies -- launch vehicles, power systems, that kind of thing -- and still restrained by the laws of physics. While we may not know anything about the weapon itself, we can figure out the rest.

So suppose an unsmiling man in a grey suit delivers a magical beam weapon to us, and insists we make it functional. All we know are its requirements. Some of these we can divine from what we saw on Sept. 11th.

1. Orbit

The beam weapon must fire from almost directly above its target, and must do so unseen. If it fired at an angle, the beam -- allegedly capable of destroying the WTC towers -- would have cut through at an angle, leaving a quite interesting damage path, one that was not seen on TV. Likewise, TV cameras did not capture any blimps or dirigibles or large aircraft hovering high above the Towers. Thus, we assume the beam system was orbital.

There are basically two choices for an orbital system: LEO (Low Earth Orbit) and GEO (Geosynchronous) or similar orbits. Both of these orbits have problems.

Recall that not one tower was destroyed, but two. The South Tower fell at 9:59 AM, and the North Tower fell at 10:28. In LEO, the orbital period is a function of altitude, and the spacecraft orbits faster as it gets lower. However, the minimum usable orbit is about 90 minutes long. If the two different firings suggested happened on successive orbits, i.e. 29 minutes apart, the spacecraft altitude would have been below sea level. This is impossible.

If the two firings occurred on the same orbit, we now require a much, much higher orbit. A true GEO orbit won't work either, since you only remain geostationary above the equator, otherwise the spacecraft will appear to oscillate north and south while retaining the same longitude. We need a firing angle that is just about straight down and stays that way for 30 minutes, or 1/48th of an orbit. A GEO track would move by a minimum of 7.5% of peak latitude, or over 1.6o of latitude, which may be unacceptable. So we would need to be much, much higher than GEO.

The high-orbit situation is also impractical for two military reasons. First, high orbits require much larger rockets. Second, it severely limits your options, since it could take hours, days, or even forever to orient this beam on a particular target.

The only practical solution, then, is to have two beam weapon satellites. We will assume these are orbiting in the cheapest orbit possible, i.e. LEO.

2. Beam Energy

The beam must be capable of delivering a WTC-finishing blow in roughly 10 seconds. How much energy are we talking about?

To make this exercise remotely plausible, we will consider a firing energy much lower than the tower destruction itself. For sake of argument, suppose the beam delivers 6.0 x 109 Joules of energy -- a number chosen because it is twice that of the aircraft impact kinetic energy, as calculated in Greening (pg. 10). This is an arbitrary choice but clearly a beam energy higher than the impacts is needed, since the impacts alone finished off neither structure.

We further assume that the beam weapon is 50% efficient, an "ideal" figure (cutting-edge lasers built for efficiency are typically around 16% efficient). This means a total of 1.2 x 1010 Joules of energy must be supplied by the spacecraft, over a period of 10 seconds, or 1.2 x 109 Watts of power. That is the design requirement of our black-box beam weapon.

It should be pointed out that we have neglected many efficiency-robbing problems to arrive at this figure -- attenuation by the atmosphere, for instance, and beam absorption or reflection by the target are both major concerns. In practice I would not be surprised to see an effective beam efficiency as low as 5% under ideal conditions.

3. Energy Storage

As this power figure is roughly equivalent to the output of a commercial nuclear power plant, it is clear that our WKBWD satellite cannot provide this continuously, but must store the energy. This poses a big problem.

The most obvious solution is battery power. The highest energy density rechargeable batteries currently envisioned (and these have not been qualified for space) can supply about 1 MJ / kg of battery mass. To supply the 1.2 x 1010 Joules we require, this means 12,000 kg of battery.

But this figure cannot be trusted. Recall that we require a full discharge in only ten seconds. Batteries don't like this. They heat up, which increases their internal resistance and robs power, and chemical pathways become blocked, making much of its storage unavailable. Given this requirement, our battery size would need to be much larger -- Lithium ion batteries over 20 second peak load are limited to a mere 1500 W/kg. Since our beam requires 1.2 x 109 Watts, we would actually need 8,000 tons of battery.

So batteries are out. What about capacitors? If we assume a spacecraft bus voltage of 1000 Volts (which is unacceptably high for space applications, as arcing would probably destroy our satellite), to reach our total energy requirement, E = 0.5 C V2, thus capacitance C = 24,000 Farads. This can be done with, say, ten tons of capacitors, however the leakage will be much higher -- rather than charging batteries over periods of weeks, the capacitors will require a much more rapid charge cycle, and any weight saved in the capacitors themselves will be lost to solar arrays and thermal management.

The very last possibility is the extreme explosive compression flux generator, basically a one-shot motor that uses explosives to push a magnet and a coil. This is similarly "black" and exciting to Conspiracy Theorists, but not practical here either. While this little gadget can crank out a reported 1012 Watts, it only does so for a few microseconds. To sustain our ten-second beam, we would need about a million small copies of this, and they would have to somehow be shielded from each other. Alternatively, if we convinced the beam weapon designers to change their beam, so that it fired one extremely rapid pulse, we would only need a few thousand of these.

In either case, the beam weapon would have to handle several million Amps of current, and somehow convert this into a useful, collimated beam. If anybody has any ideas how to do this, let me know. The best I can think of is a microwave waveguide -- but the biggest of these is Arecibo, it's four orders of magnitude weaker than we'd need, and it would clearly be seen orbiting the Earth!

We also have a another stealth problem. If we generate a 1.2 x 1010 Joule energy pulse, that means we're setting off much more than 1.2 x 1010 Joules worth of explosives, or 3 tons TNT equivalent, in orbit. This can be done, provided we don't mind creating a flash in the upper atmosphere that would be clearly visible to the naked eye in full daylight, and provided we don't mind alerting the early warning systems of every nuclear-armed government in the process.

4. Launch Considerations

Each of our proposed solutions above requires a satellite that masses over 10 tons for energy storage or generation above. Since the thermal control, solar generation, attitude control, and payload are also assumed to be significant, we may assume the power storage is reasonably close to a standard satellite MEL (Mass Equipment List) breakdown, and is thus around 10-25% of the total satellite mass. We thus estimate our spacecraft minimum mass is around 40 tons.

This exceeds the launch capability of any current launch vehicle -- almost double that of the Shuttle -- although Saturn V could do it.

Needless to say, this also isn't a good consideration for stealth.

Any other launch would require on-orbit assembly, and a rather complicated one at that. The extremely high-power storage and supply would have to be bridged. Pointing on the beam weapon would be critical, requiring utmost precision.

Lastly, this would mean that our astronauts are also members of the conspiracy.

5. Conclusion

Orbital beam weapons, even if the beam technology itself was sound, are not practical as tools of overt domination or covert destruction of land-based targets. There is simply no way to generate the power required to destroy hardened structures, let alone destroy them so thoroughly as to remove evidence of the beam weapon's use. In legitimate studies, beam weapons have only been considered in cases where a much lower power (1 MW or less) can achieve a useful result, such as damaging fragile sensors or puncturing thin-walled critical structures, e.g. the booster of an ICBM.

The fundamental roadblock is the ability to put power on the ground. As we saw above, the only credible approach is to use expendables, viz. explosives. In this case, the orbiting beam weapon offers no advantages over simply putting those same explosives on target. The difficulty and cost associated with the orbiting platform, coupled with the nonexistence of high performance beam emitters to begin with, makes this a complete non-starter.

-----

Thank you all for your attention. There's a sign-up sheet for my two-week Mad Scientist Camp circulating somewhere near the back.
The whole thread covers pretty much every aspect of the beam weapon hypothesis, it's quite an entertaining read (although it is 23 pages long).

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66444
__________________
"To the rational mind, nothing is inexplicable, only unexplained."
Doctor Who: Robots of Death by Chris Boucher.
Also, Stop Sylvia Browne; and all the 9/11 Conspiracy links you could ever need.
maccy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 06:23 PM   #33
Hamradioguy
Pyrrhonist
 
Hamradioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northern Vermont
Posts: 2,284
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
OK, thanks...now I see, since it cant be proven they dont exist, they must exist for their purpose
Just like God, right?
Hamradioguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 06:25 PM   #34
hellaeon
Graduate Poster
 
hellaeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: City of Burning Churches, Australia
Posts: 1,493
That response by Rmackey is such a melting of the dumbest theory. It rules.
__________________
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. - Carl Sagan
I don't exactly have a Phd in physics. I have something much better. Common sense. - pagan
How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years? It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes. - Irony, MirageMemories style
hellaeon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2007, 07:21 PM   #35
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
R.Mackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The armpit of L.A.
Posts: 7,857
Originally Posted by DontAskMe View Post
I have been advised that these absolutely do exist, I have never heard of them, google isnt any help...

Can someone explain what this is, or more accurately, do they exist and if not how do I explain that with credible links, etc. ??
maccy beat me to my "WTC Killing Beam Weapon of Doom" post. (Thanks for being on top of things!) What that derivation shows is that no matter what technology goes into the beam itself -- lasers, masers, neutral particle, Wave Motion Gun, whatever -- it is simply impossible to destroy the WTC Towers from orbit. Using the most generous estimates I could imagine, you need two satellites of minimum mass 40 tons each, assuming the beam weapon itself doesn't add any weight at all. This would require four Space Shuttle flights, and even then the satellites would be seen firing in broad daylight... and every major government in the world would be instantly alerted to high altitude explosives.

In other words, the Beam Weapon Hypothesis is absolutely impossible. I don't care what technology you think we're hiding, it simpy can't be done.

There are real "directed energy weapons" being researched, but they are not designed to destroy buildings. Instead, they go after much softer targets, like rockets. The two most "real" energy weapons are the Boeing ABL, and its follow-on, the HELLADS.

Obviously, neither of these can be scaled to Sept. 11th proportions. The ABL is roughly one one-thousandth the power used in my conservative Beam Weapon of Doom, and it won't fit in anything smaller than a 747 Cargo. The HELLADS performance goal of 1 kW per 5 kg of laser means that, if scaled up to the size we need, the laser itself would weigh almost 4,000 tons, or eight times the size of the International Space Station.
__________________
"Nothing real can defeat us. Nothing unreal exists." -B. Banzai

VT VENIANT OMNES
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2007, 02:48 PM   #36
HereticHulk
Muse
 
HereticHulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 716
How else do you explain the spire completely disintegrating?
[IMG]http_://drjudywood.com_/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image42.jpg[/IMG]

Last edited by HereticHulk; 15th September 2007 at 02:51 PM.
HereticHulk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2007, 02:53 PM   #37
Bell
beautiful freak
 
Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 21,335


How much time is between each picture?
__________________
Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.

INY
You gotta love cops.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2007, 02:54 PM   #38
Par
Master Poster
 
Par's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,769
Originally Posted by HereticHulk View Post
How else do you explain the spire completely disintegrating?
http://http_://drjudywood.com_/artic...cs/Image42.jpg

The core section did not “completely disintegrate” (or at least not in the way I suspect you mean). It merely fell leaving dust and debris in its wake.
Par is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2007, 02:57 PM   #39
Bell
beautiful freak
 
Bell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 21,335
Originally Posted by Par View Post
The core section did not “completely disintegrate” (or at least not in the way I suspect you mean). It merely fell leaving dust and debris in its wake.
Nooo! The astrojews in the ISS saw that bit of the core still standing and thought it smarter to disintegrate as well. The astrojews are such dedicated workers.
__________________
Every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.

INY
You gotta love cops.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2007, 03:01 PM   #40
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 16,969
Originally Posted by Bell View Post
http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image42.jpg

How much time is between each picture?
I also would like to see the origin of these photos.

Also welcome to the forum HereticHulk (I think)
__________________
Join the team, Show us what your machine can do (or just contribute to a good cause)Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:26 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.