On Nov 7, 9:10*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Roger Shoaf" wrote in message

...



"mike" wrote in message
....

Sorry. *I meant to agree with Robert, but my computer hiccupped. *So,
I guess I'll re-iterate (again) that it's amazing the building didn't
crumble more.

I suspect that the reason it gives that appearance is because the
buildings
collapse was cushioned a bit in the soft mud, allowing the stresses to
snap
things sequentially as it fell rather than an explosion where the energy
is
applied all at once.

Yeah but . . . (-: *Many of the windows didn't even break. *That's just
bizarre. I wonder what the "rate of descent" was. *I guess if it tipped over
gradually enough there wasn't a big slam at the end, but still, it's a
pretty amazing site. Or sight. *Or even cite. *Thanks for posting that,
Jeff.

I guess I am used to seeing collapsed buildings in the aftermath of
earthquakes where the buildings fall because they are shaken apart. *The
Shanghai building didn't have to endure any pre-collapse shaking and I am
betting the ground gave way slowly and the pilings appear to have bent
before they broke, asborbing both time and energy and moderating the forces
on the building. *Still, what a ride that must have been. *Sounds like a
project for Disney World. *Here are some random EQ photos, FWIW:

http://images.google.com/images?q=japanese+earthquakes

--
Bobby G.

"I guess if it tipped over gradually enough there wasn't a big
slam at the end..."

Imagine being in the building at the time and feeling it slowly lean
over. If it went over slow enough, you could just walk across the
floor and step onto the wall, remaining upright the entire time.

As long as you could avoid the objects sliding across the floor with
you, and the pictures and stuff falling from the opposite wall, it
looks like you could have walked away from this type of collapse
relatively unharmed.

Of course, getting to the door that was now on the ceiling could be
tricky!