How fast can a building fall into itself?

That one day 3 buildings suddenly fell with almost no resistance

With knowledge of physics, we can easily understand what causes 3 buildings to collapse into their own footprint near free-fall.

Something does not add up

If you fall from a building, wouldn’t it be weird when the building was on the ground before you reached the ground? Note that you have air-resistance and reach only a maximum speed of 200km/h.
What resistance would a building meet? Every part of the building itself.

But at 9/11 these 3 buildings were falling near free-fall.
That is just as fast as you falling down, or faster depending on the terminal velocity.

Notice the side-ways movement of almost all heavy building structure

A lot of material from the buildings were expelled side-wards. So much that some people survived standing underneath the towers.
Some parts were even falling faster downward, due to an initial explosive push.

Even the steel core structures inside them, were not hindering the free fall.
While they really should have. They are keeping the towers standing.
The resistance was like open air. All solid structure underneath was removed just before the rest of the building fell into it. It was moved side-wards.

The structures were made to resist airplanes. And to resist huge fires with heat resistant steel (contains Molybdenum).

Steel that was found back in the dust in small iron spheres. These spheres show that the steel was vaporized. The dust was also extremely corrosive, damaging cars and nearby buildings.

Additionally molten Molybdenum was found on nearby buildings.
With the remains of some of the fire-fighters.
Fires went on for weeks, even under water.

Maybe we were lied to by the officials.
Maybe they had something to hide.
Like trillions of dollars.

For more information look at:

Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth - https://www.ae911truth.org/

Richard Gage - https://richardgage911.org/

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
Center Catastrophe (pdf)

The basic physics explained by David Chandler.
He can tell it better than I can.

Some questions and answers

Here I answer some questions that I encountered on forums.
At the Architects and Engineers site, they will answer these questions a lot better, so check them out, if you are not satisfied with my answers.

Wouldn’t the fires from the planes cause damage to the structures?
The structure was only partially exposed to fire. Starting with one fireball at the initial impact, that consumed most of the kerosene. And according to fire-fighters the fires were under control and no longer dangerous. No other parts of building 1 &2 were on fire. The fire of building 7 was also very local.
A local fire does not weaken the whole structure and steel spreads heat reducing much of the effect. That is how (heat-resistant) steel structures of buildings can be completely on fire without any problems.

Wouldn’t cause the collapse of floors some kind of side-ways force due to the compression of air?
The movement of the dust can tell us exactly how the air and gasses are moving. And we can clearly see that the structures move sideways in front of the gasses and not following them. Dust is even following it, as these structures appear to desintegrate in the air.
We can also see that the compression happens after the floor collapse, and not just before.
In a normal situation, the air would leave through the open windows and will not affect the heavy and strong structures much.

I saw a building in Iran collapse from fire. Isn’t this the same?
The building in Iran was fully on fire for a long time, and clearly did not have a heat resistant steel core. Maybe it also had wooden structures that were affected?
The building regulations in these countries are very different.
The collapse clearly shows no signs of outward expelled heavy structures, which means that the building was weakened a lot on the inside.
While the collapse seems fast, it will fall slower than the WTC buildings. That is because the underlying structure will cause resistance. It is hard to see, and needs careful measurements.

I saw a video that demonstrated a fast floor-by-floor collapse in a model. Why can this not work?
Some people try to construct a small tower and let it collapse. They usually do not understand physics well.
These structures have a standing edges, the floors can collapse into each other quickly. Like a ladder.
It seems fast, but it is still slower than the WTC buildings. That is because with each next layer, the floors above encounter resistance.
What you can also see is that the standing sides are not collapsing. They are the carrying structure. So in a real tower they would just keep standing, and the tower would not even collapse. Only the floors would collapse, probably causing some damage to the building that would be clearly visible.

Steel is weak when it is hot from fires. Why do you think that this is not a problem?
1- The free-fall can not be reached with weakened steel. Even when it would turn into blubber. It would give a slow and local collapse.
2- The steel structure spreads the heat, but never reached a high temperature. The amount of kerosene is too small to create a high temperature, with a structure this large in the open and colder air. Even at the location of the fire, you can see that the structure is not weakened, but that the structure is suddenly absent.
3- The steel (with Molybdenum) and structure was heat resistant. They are made to resist huge fires.
4- Fire fighters and investigators saw molten steel. In the dust there is remains of vaporized steel.