 |
It's all Isaac Newton's fault-Bridge collapse likely caused by Newton's laws.... But, Ernest Rutherford saved us from further damage....
Author: BOB2
Date: 10-19-2023 - 14:51
trackwalker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> J.K. Trowling Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Not effective when the bridge collapses. The
> > question is which came first-- the collapse or
> > derailment.
>
> If it was in fact a broken rail of course it was
> a derailment that happened first. What would
> cause the bridge to collapse first??
Where exactlyh did anyone say the bridge collapsed first? Although that could break more rail...
Probably has something to do with Newton's laws of motion, force, and gravity from the looks of things. And probably even in that order... With the strong nuclear force finally preventing further damage...
Rail breaks from fatigue, then choo-choo cars go off tracks, and mucho "mass" in loaded coal cars continues to move (bodies in motion tend to stay in motion), resulting in all of the "force" (force equals mass times acceleration) hit the bridge, likely knocking it off of it's supports.
And then the forces of gravity (force of gravity equals mass times acceleration squared) caused choo-choo cars and bridge to plumet down onto the highway.
Until finally, the strong nuclear force stopped it from oozing through the very atoms in the roadway, and being sucked down to the earth's core.
What was the condition of the tracks and the cause of the broken rail? Was the rail alredy broken or did it fail at the time of the accident under loaded conditions? Were there centering bridge rails to keep the cars alligned and from hitting the bridge, and knocking it off it's supports?
This will all make for some interesting reading in a future NTSB report.
What is the status of the repairs and the line operations?
And of course, I am wondering if there will be many protests, because of the failure of the President of the United States to come and visit this train wreck site?
-------------------------------------------------------
> J.K. Trowling Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Not effective when the bridge collapses. The
> > question is which came first-- the collapse or
> > derailment.
>
> If it was in fact a broken rail of course it was
> a derailment that happened first. What would
> cause the bridge to collapse first??
Where exactlyh did anyone say the bridge collapsed first? Although that could break more rail...
Probably has something to do with Newton's laws of motion, force, and gravity from the looks of things. And probably even in that order... With the strong nuclear force finally preventing further damage...
Rail breaks from fatigue, then choo-choo cars go off tracks, and mucho "mass" in loaded coal cars continues to move (bodies in motion tend to stay in motion), resulting in all of the "force" (force equals mass times acceleration) hit the bridge, likely knocking it off of it's supports.
And then the forces of gravity (force of gravity equals mass times acceleration squared) caused choo-choo cars and bridge to plumet down onto the highway.
Until finally, the strong nuclear force stopped it from oozing through the very atoms in the roadway, and being sucked down to the earth's core.
What was the condition of the tracks and the cause of the broken rail? Was the rail alredy broken or did it fail at the time of the accident under loaded conditions? Were there centering bridge rails to keep the cars alligned and from hitting the bridge, and knocking it off it's supports?
This will all make for some interesting reading in a future NTSB report.
What is the status of the repairs and the line operations?
And of course, I am wondering if there will be many protests, because of the failure of the President of the United States to come and visit this train wreck site?
