World Trade 9/11 Earthquake Catalog |
The seismic signals from Palisades, NY, are the official data used by NIST in their report. Palisades is also the closest seismographic station to the WTC complex so the choice is a natural one as the signals would be larger and hold more information as they would be less dampened compared to farther seismic stations such as BRNJ.
I have not checked what the draft reports say compared to the final (official report) but I don’t think they changed the location of the data source.
I don’t know if Dr. Wood analysed the signals from other seismic stations, but as she filed a Request for Corrections to NIST, and later sued the contractors appointed by NIST to help draft the report, it is normal she addresses the data that NIST present and discuss.
I see you have written Michael Pasyanos a question, did you get an answer? And what are you trying to prove? What is your point? I believe you support the nuclear demolition theory.
Please read this report by Columbia University which is running the 34 seismographs including BRNJ: https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/.../WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf.
I quote from the report: “The modern stations record over a broad frequency band; some like PAL sample three components of ground motion, but others, only the vertical.” So PAL is probably the best choice for analysis.
Quote “Seismic waves from Collapse 2 were recorded by at least 13 stations ranging in distance from 34 km to Lisbon, NH at 428 km. The magnitude of the event was only 2.3. The predominant signals at distances greater than 200 km are short-period surface waves.”
Quote “Surface waves were the largest seismic waves observed at various stations. The presence of seismic body waves is questionable even at Palisades for the two largest collapses; they are not observed at other stations.” They are saying that not even the nearest station, that is PAL, picked up the body waves and that practically only surface waves were measured. Surface waves do not travel through the earth as body waves (that is, shear waves and transverse waves). Surface waves are generated when you remove the load from a surface, for example, as happened with the two Towers when they were turned mostly to dust in 10 seconds. Simply, the earth will react to the weight being removed by oscillating on the surface just like when you get out of bed each morning and your mattress recoils and waves propagate on its surface (ok, a mattress is an extremely damping medium).
Quote “Six stations within the greater Metropolitan New York region (Fig. 2) recorded the two tower collapses. Vertical-component records are shown in Figure 3 as a record section of distance as a function of travel time. The dotted lines indicate velocities from 1.5 to 2.5 km/s assuming propagation along straight paths from the WTC to the stations. Unlike signals at distant stations, the predominant waves are surface waves of short period (about 1 s)…” and:
“Relatively simple and similar pulses with durations of about 5 to 6 s arrive at stations BRNJ, TBR and ARNY starting at a group velocity of 2.0 km/s.” So BRNJ signal was indeed considered and:
“Thus, we conclude that the pulse duration at those four stations reflects mainly that the generation of seismic energy from the collapse was delivered over 5-6 s.” So the main energy from the collapse lasted just 5–6 s, consistent with little mass slamming to the ground and the buildings disappearing into dust.
Quote “The gravitational potential energy associated with the collapse of each tower is at least 10^11 J. The energy propagated as seismic waves for ML 2.3 is about 10^6 to 10^7 J. Hence, only a very small portion of the potential energy was converted into seismic waves. Most of the energy went into deformation of buildings and the formation of rubble and dust. The perception of people in the vicinity of the collapses as reported in the media seems to be in full accord with the notion that ground shaking was not a major contributor to the collapse or damage to surrounding buildings.” So again, the buildings did not slam to the ground!
Dr. Wood not only questions the relatively small magnitude registered at Palisades but also questions the nature of the seismic signals.
“but others, only the vertical.” Simply not true and I posted a video to this effect.
So PAL is probably the best choice for analysis.” This is also wrong.
You don’t have anything right.
pulse duration has nothing to do the topic. surface waves are the first 20 miles, so all explosions fall inside this zone. They write “local explosion” on the draft reports.
“Relatively simple and similar pulses with durations of about 5 to 6 s arrive at stations BRNJ, TBR and ARNY starting at a group velocity of 2.0 km/s.”
TBR is Table Rock, NY 132 miles away
ARNY Arden House, NY 41.680 miles away
ARNY Arden House, NY 41.680 miles away
I see you have written Michael Pasyanos a question, did you get an answer? If I did you would see the email response.
PAL is not the closest. BRNJ is only 9 miles more then PAL. If your facts are wrong even at the most basic level, what makes you think you have anything right? NIST did not model the only connection they modeled for WTC 7 correctly, so that’s a reason NOT to use their data, but as Judy Wood guy you would not know about the NIST modeling issues would you?
AMNH 5.15 miles away
CPNY 6.15 miles away
CNY 8.37 miles away
CUNY 10.19 miles away
FOR 12.51 .19 miles away
MONJ 13.25 miles away
N61a 13.25 miles away
CPNY 6.15 miles away
CNY 8.37 miles away
CUNY 10.19 miles away
FOR 12.51 .19 miles away
MONJ 13.25 miles away
N61a 13.25 miles away
draft reports say “local explosive”
Everything is missing. The exact location of these earthquakes can’t be found!
Lisa A Wald
4:21 PM (2 hours ago)
to me, archive
I asked the head of the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) about this, and he said:
The Sept 11 2001 events are not in the NEIC catalog because our station spacing was too sparse to get a good location and magnitude. We do not have classified information about the events. The events were carefully studied by the local seismic network at Lamont-Doherty. Reference: Kim et al., EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union, volume 82 no. 47 November, 20 2001.
-Lisa
--------------------------------------------------
Lisa A Wald
Geophysicist & Web Design,Content,IA,UX
USGS Earthquake Hazards Program
--------------------------------------------------
The Missing Seismology Mystery of 9/11
you are under the towers. problem #2
A search of that document returned ZERO RESULTS!!