The physics of "back and to the left"

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: The physics of "back and to the left"  (Read 1975 times)

Offline Robert Reeves

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 263
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2022, 06:02:22 PM »


 The piece of brain matter on JFK's suit coat cuff that Robert Reeves claims is "Two tiny holes".

Don't twist the words I've already used in this thread. Don't be a weasel, making yourself look petty.

I am quite clear what I believe that mark on JFK's jacket is. It appears to be an abrasion to the fabric. Exposing the jacket's white inner lining - underneath - which is stained with blood. And this can be seen in the photo you've posted. The red/brown areas are blood soaked. I've posted all this, and you haven't done anything to disprove what I said, other than tried to take once piece, one little fraction of the entire post, and twist it, to use in your own narrative.

The interesting thing that you will not address why the mark on the jacket of JFK is consistent with the 'blob' or 'projectiles' path, as shown in the Zapruder film. FROM RIGHT TO LEFT moving across the coat sleeve.





Even the most irrational lone shooter believer must be curious as why there appears to be a version of the Zapruder film that shows a glowing projectile striking, firstly,  JFK's wrist, and secondly JFK's chin, appearing, to anyone with an open mind ... to be the cause of JFK's head movement to the right. I haven't faked this scenario. Either someone on Stone's editing team has added this projectile, or it's there originally. And more importantly, why isn't this projectile glowing thing in  any other versions of the Zapruder film? According to Joe Hutshing they obtained a copy of the FBI's version of the Zapruder film. So how your assertions be true that this is an inferior copy of the z-film?

The mark on the sleeve is just a very very interesting coincidence of which you or I cannot prove either way. I have requested from the archives a high res photo of the mark on the sleeve. They will not provide a close up of the area.


See, the problem is Steve, you are just trying too hard to disprove anyone messing with the original verdict, again. You are just being unreasonable and actually not allowing yourself to be open minded.

When the jacket photo is subjected to line detection, embossing filters we can only see
1. cuts made by the parkland doctors in the jacket
2. this unexplained mark on the right sleeve.

It doesn't prove either way who is right, but this can easily be resolved if someone is ever to see the jacket in person and inspect the cloth for abrasions/tears/holes.



You're shooting the messenger instead of just trying to find the facts.

I could go on more about this, the suspicious covering of the right sleeve for the Warren Commission exhibit, for instance. This only becomes suspicious when the later 80s photo released by the archives reveals what not shown. This mark on the right sleeve of JFK appears to have been purposely hidden.

Why would this jacket be positioned in such a way to not show the mark on the right sleeve?



Does the Zapruder film show the tear on the right sleeve before the fatal head shot? if this the white underlining of the jacket showing?



or?



While we're at z-253, what is the mark on JFK's jaw, corresponding to the area seen where the projectile strikes JFK?





Don't shoot the messenger.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2022, 06:05:18 PM by Robert Reeves »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #20 on: June 30, 2022, 06:02:22 PM »

Offline Steve Barber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #21 on: June 30, 2022, 08:39:58 PM »
 Mr. Reeves, I did address your nonsense!   This "white blob", as you call it, doesn't appear in the MPI copy of the film which happens to be the original film,  not a multi generation copy like you are using.  As I said earlier, you are using an inferior copy of the film!  The "white blob" is nothing but an artifact in the film you're using.  And the pink spot of head matter on JFK's suit coat cuff didn't get there until the fatal bullet struck him, so *YOU* "stop twisting" things around to try creating a new theory.  And the whitish object that you are pointing arrows to on JFK's suit coat cuff in later Z film frames is nothing but the sunlight reflecting off suit coat sleeve cuff buttons. 
« Last Edit: July 01, 2022, 01:33:24 AM by Steve Barber »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #21 on: June 30, 2022, 08:39:58 PM »

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 950
    • SPMLaw
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2022, 06:55:42 AM »
Quote from: Joe Elliott
JFKs body clearly did not move backwards with constant momentum. Not only did the speed pick up, but the amount of mass which moved greatly increased, from JFKs head alone moving at first, to both the head and torso moving by z315.
You have to take into account gravity and recoil from the head explosion. It is complicated because JFK was leaning forward when hit so the impulse from the head explosion has to push his body up initially against gravity and then gravity takes over and he falls.

Quote
And this constant acceleration could not be accounted for by the acceleration of the limousine. While the limousine did accelerate slightly (likely related to the downward slope of the road) from z305 to z312, the acceleration was about one tenth of the amount required to explain JFKs head acceleration during z313 through z318.

So, the JFKs head was pushed backwards by a bullet from the front fails the physics test. This constant acceleration can only be accounted for by the Neurological Spasm theory.
There is no evidence that a person shot in the head generates muscle spasms. There are many films of people being shot in the back of the head. They just collapse and fall.

However, there is evidence of matter exploding out of the right front of JFK's head likely carrying momentum much greater than the forward momentum of the bullet.  The recoil from this would be an equal and opposite impulse to the head pushing it back and to the left.

Quote
What is my expertise on this? Not much, but more than most people. I took physics in my senior year of high school. Where I learned about the conservation of momentum and the conservation of energy. I would be lost except the physics of the JFK head shot involves the most basic concepts on Newtonian Physics.
one cannot ignore the explosion of the head. The momentum of the matter exploding in a generally forward direction from the front right side of his head can be, and likely is, much more than the forward momentum imparted by the bullet.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2022, 06:55:42 AM »

Offline Steve Barber

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 303
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2022, 04:18:30 PM »

However, there is evidence of matter exploding out of the right front of JFK's head likely carrying momentum much greater than the forward momentum of the bullet.  The recoil from this would be an equal and opposite impulse to the head pushing it back and to the left.
one cannot ignore the explosion of the head. The momentum of the matter exploding in a generally forward direction from the front right side of his head can be, and likely is, much more than the forward momentum imparted by the bullet.

 The explosion isn't on the right front of the head, rather, its the top of the head that was blown off.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2022, 04:18:30 PM »

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 950
    • SPMLaw
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2022, 05:53:08 PM »
The explosion isn't on the right front of the head, rather, its the top of the head that was blown off.
Matter exploded out of the right side of the upper head as he was leaning forward and turned somewhat to his left. What determines the direction of the recoil impulse is the direction the exploding matter. 

We don't have to guess about that. We can see it.

The matter exploded outward from the ruptured head carrying momentum in the general forward direction relative to the car and somewhat to the right of the direction JFK was facing. The head necessarily received an equal impulse in the opposite direction. So the momentum imparted to the head from the explosion was backward relative to the car which was back and a bit to the left of the direction that is 180 degrees to the direction JFK had been facing.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2022, 05:56:04 PM by Andrew Mason »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2022, 05:53:08 PM »

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 950
    • SPMLaw
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2022, 08:31:05 PM »
By the way, the proof that a bullet from the back can cause rearward motion is seen in the turkey shoot video that Chad Zimmerman did in 2008.  He hung a freshly killed turkey from a frame and strapped pork ribs to the back.  He fired his 6.5 mm Mannlicher-Carcano using WC 6.5 mm copper jacketed bullet from the left side into the back (left side) of the turkey.  The bullet struck and passed through one of the ribs and its subsequent passage through the turkey caused an explosive exit wound on the right side.  The turkey moved backwards, toward the rifle:


A copy can be downloaded here.

Here it is slowed down from 30 fps to 2 fps on a continuous loop with a 2 second pause:


Having the bullet strike a pork rib bone is somewhat analogous to a bullet striking the skull.  This will flatten the bullet so that it then plows through the ensuing matter building up pressure in front of the bullet until the pressure exceeds the ability of the target to withstand.  The result is an explosion of matter from the target outward from the ruptured part of the target. 

There are obvious differences between shooting a turkey and a live human head.  The pressure inside the rigid skull will be higher so the explosive impulse ejecting the matter and the resulting recoil to the head will be higher.   The mass of the turkey is also greater than that of a human head so the recoil speed would be less with the turkey for the same amount of forward momentum of matter ejected.

But the main point is that the direction the target moves is back toward the shooter.  And it is rapid and observable.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2022, 12:44:55 AM by Andrew Mason »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2022, 08:31:05 PM »

Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1430
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2022, 10:46:58 PM »

You have to take into account gravity and recoil from the head explosion. It is complicated because JFK was leaning forward when hit so the impulse from the head explosion has to push his body up initially against gravity and then gravity takes over and he falls.
There is no evidence that a person shot in the head generates muscle spasms. There are many films of people being shot in the back of the head. They just collapse and fall.

However, there is evidence of matter exploding out of the right front of JFK's head likely carrying momentum much greater than the forward momentum of the bullet.  The recoil from this would be an equal and opposite impulse to the head pushing it back and to the left.
one cannot ignore the explosion of the head. The momentum of the matter exploding in a generally forward direction from the front right side of his head can be, and likely is, much more than the forward momentum imparted by the bullet.

Lets take one point at a time.

You have to take into account gravity

JFK was sitting pretty much upright, with a slight lean forward. During the early part of the movement, z313-z316, the movement was even slightly uphill. But it never mattered. The acceleration was constant. Even when he did start to tilt backwards, the acceleration he would get from gravity was a fraction of the acceleration
Using physics graduate student Michael Hoffmans calculations, the acceleration of the head during z314-z315. z315-z316 and z316-z317 was 0.26 Gs, 0.26 Gs and 0.17 Gs. Note, I converted Hoffmans numbers from feet per second squared to Gs. If the head and body were reclined 90 degrees, lying flat on his back, and JFK was free to continue to fall, gravity could accelerate JFKs head at 1.0 Gs.

My understanding of classical physics is pretty rudimentary. But acceleration of a simple inverted pendulum, shown at:

http://pmaweb.caltech.edu/~phy003/handout_source/Inverted_Pendulum/InvertedPendulum.pdf

The acceleration would be 1 G times the sin of the angle, 1 G * sin (a) where the angle is 0 degrees if JFK is sitting bolt upright, 45 degrees if he is greatly reclined backwards and 90 degrees if he is lying on his back.

Yes, I know, this is not a simple inverted pendulum, because JFKs torso did not contain negligible mass. Still, I think this what I would expect, an acceleration proportional to the sin of the angle.

Acceleration due to gravity alone would not reach 0.26 Gs until JFK was reclined back at 15 degrees. The sign of 15 degrees is roughly 0.26. Looking even at z317, which is getting pretty late in the acceleration, he still seems to be sitting mostly upright. He may be leaning a significant amount to his left. Its hard to tell. But this would not affect his acceleration backwards.

It is clear to me that the acceleration of JFKs head backwards from z313 through z317 was not caused by gravity. Nor was it caused by the acceleration of the car, which was slightly accelerating, but only providing less than a tenth of the acceleration needed to account for JFKs motion.

No, the acceleration was caused by something else. If not by a neurological spasm than there is simply no other explanation for this constant acceleration. Unless one goes with a stream of bullet scenario, where with each Zapruder frame, another bullet struck from the front adding more momentum to JFKs body moving backwards.

You have to take into and recoil from the head explosion

The recoil from the head explosion. By which, I believe, you mean the Jet Effect. But like the bullet from the front scenario, this would give a one-time impulse pushing the head backwards. This should not result in a constant acceleration of the head backwards, unless material was spewing out of JFKs head, carrying a good deal of momentum forward, for over a quarter of a second.


There is no evidence that a person shot in the head generates muscle spasms. There are many films of people being shot in the back of the head. They just collapse and fall.

And these are all people shot in the head with a rifle bullet? And in all cases, the bullet went through near the center of the brain? Was this established in all cases with an autopsy?

In a sense, this cannot be demonstrated. One cannot run an experiment by shooting a person in the head with a rifle bullet. If one does, by accident, have such a video, it cannot be shown because it is an affront to human dignity. I understand that a reporter was murdered by a soldier with a shot through the brain using an assault rifle and it seems to show a neurological spasm, but this cannot be shown, and I have never seen it, because it would be an affront to the dignity of his family. Showing video of JFKs murder seems to be the only exception.

For those who argue against the Neurological spasm, they need the following guidelines to be strictly adhered to.

1.   Only video of people is to be used as evidence.
2.   Video of animals being shot through the brain are to be ignored, because, for all we know, for unknown reasons, all animals would react one way but people would react another. Even demonstrating this for a dozen different species, some of them primates, would make no difference.
3.   Without any proof from a video of a human being shot, the default assumption is that the Neurological Spasm does not occur in humans, until it is proven that it does.


These guidelines put LNers, like myself in an impossible Catch-22 position. We cant run an experiment but if such a video falls into our laps, we cant use it because it would be an affront to human dignity. And we would likely be sued by the victims family.


Let me propose a different set of guidelines:

1.   Only video of people is to be used as evidence.
2.   Video of animals being shot through the brain are to be ignored, because, for all we know, for unknown reasons, all animals would react one way but people would react another. Even demonstrating this for a dozen different species, some of them primates, would make no difference.
3.   Without any proof from a video of a human being shot, the default assumption is that the Neurological Spasm does occur in humans, until it is proven that it does not.


I am using the same guidelines as before except I have reversed Guideline 3. If this is done, now CTers are in a Catch-22. Even if the Neurological Spasm were a myth, for both animals and humans, they could not prove this. All experiments on animals are considered irrelevant. All video of humans being shot in the head with a rifle bullet, causing their brains to explode out of their head, but no Neurological Spasm being observed, could not be used to disprove the Theory of Neurological Spasm, because the showing of such video would be an affront to human dignity, and might get them sued by the victims family.

Instead, let me propose a more reasonable set of guidelines.

1.   If we have good videos, of people being shot, with rifle bullets, causing their brains to explode out of their heads, the results from these videos and these videos only should determine if the Neurological Spasm occurs in humans or not. Video of animals being shot would be considered irrelevant.
2.   If we cannot use Guideline 1, because of human dignity considerations, fear of lawsuits, or for other reasons, then we must rely of video of animals being shot in the head.
If the Neurological Spasm is seen in animals, then it must be considered to be good evidence that it would also occur in humans.


No, its not absolute proof. We dont get absolute proof in this world for anything. But it should be considered good evidence

Under this last set of guidelines, which is fair to both sides, and does not put either side into an impossible Catch-22 situation, it is clear that Neurological Spasm in humans is quite possible. And, since this is the only possible explanation for the acceleration of JFKs backwards, it must be considered the most probable explanation as to why JFKs head moved and accelerated backwards continuously during z313-z318.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2022, 10:46:58 PM »

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3711
  • Skeptic
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2022, 05:29:02 AM »
... it is clear that Neurological Spasm in humans is quite possible. And, since this is the only possible explanation for the acceleration of JFKs backwards, it must be considered the most probable explanation as to why JFKs head moved and accelerated backwards continuously...
Stated like the preceding part of the post proved something while admitting that it cannot demonstratively be proven.
It is stated that something is possible and then concluding it is the only possibility.
Other possibilities always remain. Perhaps JFK was hit simultaneously with two shots thereby causing a violent reaction. Although this also can no longer be a proven probability.
However combined with ear witness statements and an assumption that there could have been at least two shooters it cannot be eliminated as a possibility.
Finally, even if there was a spasmodic reaction to a single shot as theorized ...it doesn't prove who did the shooting.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #27 on: July 07, 2022, 05:29:02 AM »

Offline Gary Craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
  • The human mind is our fundamental resource. JFK
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2022, 04:46:20 PM »
Stated like the preceding part of the post proved something while admitting that it cannot demonstratively be proven.
It is stated that something is possible and then concluding it is the only possibility.
Other possibilities always remain. Perhaps JFK was hit simultaneously with two shots thereby causing a violent reaction. Although this also can no longer be a proven probability.
However combined with ear witness statements and an assumption that there could have been at least two shooters it cannot be eliminated as a possibility.
Finally, even if there was a spasmodic reaction to a single shot as theorized ...it doesn't prove who did the shooting.


quote author=Martin Hinrichs

"What we see here is in my eyes clearly the impact-moment of the shot which hits Kennedy in his back."



"Credit Giuseppe Sabatino"

= 2nd shooter IMO

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2022, 04:46:20 PM »

Offline Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2282
Re: The physics of "back and to the left"
« Reply #29 on: July 11, 2022, 01:14:36 AM »

quote author=Martin Hinrichs

"What we see here is in my eyes clearly the impact-moment of the shot which hits Kennedy in his back."



"Credit Giuseppe Sabatino"

= 2nd shooter IMO

The shot through JFK has already occurred before z228.
That's why his fists are already up near his throat.
IMO, the movement forward is part of his reaction to a shot that has already passed through him.
The main reason for thinking this is that JBC is already reacting violently by this point.

 

Mobile View