The Education Forum

# Count me among the sacrilegious, but I believe the throat wound may have been one of exit

## Recommended Posts

This is my hypothesis, in slow motion, as it were:

(1) The *pointy* bullet enters the forehead causing little damage, the small orifice cannot possibly move an adult, much less reverse his forward movement.

As the bullet enters the spheroid skull, the expanding pressure wave preceding it dramatically increases internal pressure until the skull ruptures. Prior to the skull rupture, we have a spheroid containing high pressure with a small hole approximately equal to the diameter of the intruding bullet. This small hole is inadequate in size to prevent an increase in internal pressure. Brain tissue, blood, fluid, etc. are expelled through the small bullet hole.

This is analogous to the combustion chamber of a rocket engine in the sense that "thrust" is produced by the high velocity exit of mass from within the skull.

Pardon the venture into Rocket Science 101, but this is the ONLY way to calculate the forces at work:

THRUST = mdot Ve + (Pe - Po)Ae

"mdot" = the change in mass of the head due to the ejection of blood, brain tissue, etc.

"Ve" = the velocity of the ejected matter

"Pe-Po" = the pressure within the skull - the ambient pressure

"Ae" = the area of the bullet hole

If you will provide the mass of the ejected matter via the entry wound, the velocity of this matter at the exit point, the existing pressure within the skull,and the area of the hole in his forehead, I will gladly calculate the thrust produced via the hole in JFK's forehead. This is a simple equation, requiring only multiplication, addition and subtraction. Finally, if you will provide the time interval over which this thrust occurred, I will gladly calculate the total force available to move the body rearward. Until you can calculate this total force, the velocity of his body movement following bullet entry is pure conjecture.

Your statement that this "small orifice cannot possibly move an adult, much less reverse his forward movement." begs the following question: How much force IS required to "move" an adult. Did JFK's entire 180 lb. body actually move from one location to another (i.e. translate) or did he simply pivot at the waist (and neck)? The body from the waist up, pretty much balances atop the pelvis and this balance is maintained by various muscles. This man was brain dead-did his muscles oppose the movement? I don't know how much force is require to pivot the upper body, but my guess is, not much. Not identical of course, but more easily visualized: Stand on your "tip-toes" with your body as relaxed as possible - go to your 'happy place' - without warning someone applies a small to moderate force to your head. Will you lose your balance? If you don't react to recover you balance, I suspect you will topple over backwards.

Next, what happens as the bullet exits the skull leaving another avenue of pressure release? Are you certain the bullet creates a small hole in the rear of the skull, and only then does the back of the head come off? Since the pressure wave precedes the bullets position, wouldn't the expanding pressure *ahead* of the bullet blow the rear of the skull off, *prior* to the arrival of the slower traveling bullet?

Your statements numbered 2-5 can only be dealt with if we can reach a consensus regarding statement 1.

Tom

Edited by Tom Neal

• Replies 57
• Created

#### Popular Days

This is assuming two things; that the bullet that entered the front of JFK's head actually exited his skull, and that the large "exit" wound in the right rear of his skull was in alignment with the path of this bullet.

Hi Bob:

Please go here, click in "View Brief" and read the "Contest Brief".

"Numerical Analysis of the Detailed Effects of a Bullet Passing Through a Human Cranium"

I am going with the minimalist scenario. Those simulations cost a pretty penny and you must start with Occam.

If you, Horne, Mantik, Chris Newton, etc. want to add a 2nd. bullet, you better bring a sack of dollars, to include your bullet(s), angle, etc.

Then again, this is a great business opportunity. Will explain later. Keep tuned.

-Ramon

"Numerical Analysis of the Detailed Effects of a Bullet Passing Through a Human Cranium"

Ramon

Why are you assuming the bullet went through JFK's cranium? Have you never heard of a bullet breaking up completely, and not exiting a cranium?

Edited by Robert Prudhomme
##### Share on other sites

Tom Neal,

You write:

THRUST = mdot Ve + (Pe - Po)Ae

I assume THRUST is a force, or is meant to be a force. Force is expressed in units of pounds (lbs), Newtons, etc. That's the left side of the equation.

The right side of the equation has two terms. They need to be forces also, so that the equation balances in terms of units. In other words, force (left-hand side of the equation) needs to equal force (right-hand side of the equation).

Yet the term "mdot Ve " is a term of mass multiplied by velocity. Mass x Velocity (mv) equals momentum. Momentum is different from force. It has units of gram meter/second (for example), which is not a unit value of force. So the equation "THRUST = mdot Ve + (Pe - Po)Ae" cannot be correct, because the left-hand side involves units of force; the right-hand side involves units of momentum); and the equation doesn't balance in units.

I agree that the term "(Pe - Po)Ae" expresses a force. Pressure is in units of Newtons/meter2. Area is in units of meter2. So "(Pe - Po)Ae" is in units of Newtons, a unit of force.

BTW, this is not B.S. It's college freshman physics, even high school physics. Equations need to balance not only numerically but also in terms of units.

Having a degree in electrical engineering, which is much the same as having a degree in applied physics, I've often considered writing a diary here on basic physics. It's interesting. But I've been concerned such a diary would be buried the way my diary on how an intelligence operation works was buried.

Anyway, thanks Tom. No criticism intended. You just struck an old chord.

##### Share on other sites

Why are you assuming the bullet went through JFK's cranium? Have you never heard of a bullet breaking up completely, and not exiting a cranium?

Bob,
Is there not evidence of a missile lodged near the right eye socket?
We do not see evidence of a frontal shot entering the facial area although there may be a entry just above the hairline in the forehead. Would it be more likely that a missile, lodged in the eye socket area, entered from the back of the skull and did not exit?
A trail of fragments through the cranium could be attributed to either a front or rear shot.
Do we agree that there is probably a hole in the back of JFK's skull on the lower right side? If we agree that this is likely, what caused it?
If we have a large hole in the back of the skull and a missile lodged near the eye socket isn't this evidence of two rounds impacting the skull from two different directions?
##### Share on other sites

Regarding the back and to the left motion, Bugliosi says that the momentum of a bullet would only move a 10 pound head a few inches. Let's see:

Assume a 155 grain (10 gram) Mannlicher Carcano bullet traveling at 2000 feet per second.

Momentum is mass times velocity = 10 grams times 2000 feet per second = 20,000 gram feet per second.

If you assume all this momentum gets transferred to a 10 pound head (about 4540 grams) (this didn't happen with JFK, since some momentum was transferred to flying skull and brain, but for simplicity sake:

20,000 gram-feet per second divided by 4500 gram head weight, would result in a head traveling at 4.4 feet per second.

These are all approximations; we don't know what kind of bullet hit JFK in the head, but the backward head snap looks to me like a head traveling at several feet per second, until it was slowed by the rest of the body impacting the rear seat.

##### Share on other sites

Remember the car he's in is moving as well so he's got inertia.. Does his head move back or does it stop moving forward (while the car continues, only in that context making it look like, in a panning film, like the body moves back)?

##### Share on other sites

Back on topic and directly related to Ramon's initial statement:

Given the fact that all the evidence is fuzzy and inexact (I am being polite here), it is entirely possible that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited near his throat.

The evidence that's "fuzzy", I assume, is your belief that the autopsy photo of the neck wound shows a gaping jagged hole 3 to 3 1/2 inches in length.

Every Parkland doctor I've heard interviewed stated that this wound was tampered with after Kennedy's body left Parkland. They state Dr. Perry who enlarged the existing ENTRANCE wound was a skilled surgeon who could not have been responsible for the wound you see.

Dr. Crenshaw:

##### Share on other sites

Anyway, thanks Tom. No criticism intended. You just struck an old chord.

Jon,

I think you're agreeing/not disagreeing with my point which is that although the math is simple, we do NOT know the values to plug into the equation to calculate the force applied to the body. IF we knew the force applied to the body, we still do not know how much force is required to rotate his head and body at the neck and at the waist. Without the results of these calculations we can NOT determine the response of the body due to this applied force. The only practical way to measure this directly would be utilizing a very recently deceased cadaver and high speed photography.

If the above difficulties were overcome and a film of a bullet to the head was actually produced it would require the original unaltered z-film for comparison. It's fair to say that the extant Z-film is questionable at best...

Tom

Edited by Tom Neal
##### Share on other sites

A trail of fragments through the cranium could be attributed to either a front or rear shot.

Just to toss in my 2 cents worth: The trail of fragments would be approximately cone-shaped with the apex of the cone representing the bullet's point of entry into the head.

Tom

##### Share on other sites

The best evidence is that the throat wound was one of entrance. The best evidence is that at least some shots were fired from in front. There is no need to pigeonhole data in order to accept any of the fatally flawed conclusions of the authorities. They lied. The cover up was not benign. It was designed to conceal the truth, and we need to stop making excuses for our criminally corrupt leaders.

##### Share on other sites

The best evidence is that the throat wound was one of entrance. The best evidence is that at least some shots were fired from in front. There is no need to pigeonhole data in order to accept any of the fatally flawed conclusions of the authorities. They lied. The cover up was not benign. It was designed to conceal the truth, and we need to stop making excuses for our criminally corrupt leaders.

Job #1 of the cover-up: suppression of the physical evidence.

What difference does it make if corrupt leaders tell us JFK was shot in the back at T1 or incompetent researchers tell us JFK was shot in the back at T1?

##### Share on other sites

Ramon

Why are you assuming the bullet went through JFK's cranium? Have you never heard of a bullet breaking up completely, and not exiting a cranium?

Due to my Sublime Ignorance. Here's another required reading. See the original Usenet post where I described the "Herrera Effect" below.

-Ramon

============================

From: Ramon F Herrera <ramon@conexus.net>

Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics

Subject: How does a projectile behave inside (and out) of a human head?

NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 17:26:49 UTC

Organization: Newshosting.com - Highest quality at a great price! www.newshosting.com

Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 11:26:52 -0600

I am sure I don't have to tell you to whose head I am referring.

Naive debaters contend that the entering projectile can blast the victim away. This was debunked by the MythBusters folks in Discovery Channel.

This is my hypothesis, in slow motion, as it were:

(1) The *pointy* bullet enters the forehead causing little damage, the small orifice cannot possibly move an adult, much less reverse his forward movement.

(2) The cerebral mass accumulates a lot of energy which starts to push the back of the head. This is the principle upon bombs are based: increasing accumulation and sudden release of energy.

(3) Meanwhile, the bullet -who is in a real rush, having other businesses to attend (such as being many yards behind the limo, even buried in the pavement at this point) leaves the scene of the crime. The bullet exited through a tiny hole, but left a heck of a mess behind.

(4) Eventually the accumulated and compressed brain matter pushes so hard that a disk (to simplify the math) of occipital bone cannot possibly stay in place and bolts in a backwards motion, in the exact same direction as the projectile.

(5) It was this disk which *PULLED* (not pushed!) the body of a grown up, "back and to the left".

That model should be simple enough, but it captures the essence.

Can a qualified poster please continue?

TIA,

-Ramon

Edited by Ramon F. Herrera
##### Share on other sites

Ramon

Why are you assuming the bullet went through JFK's cranium? Have you never heard of a bullet breaking up completely, and not exiting a cranium?

Are you saying that the bullet could have been obliterated by the heat during such short segment? If that is true, it would be the greatest news for my upcoming revision of the "Herrera Effect", its simulation, etc.

To tell you the truth, in my original thinking I had no idea what to do about the bullet. Had lots of trouble explaining its fate to the contestants and to the winner animator that I eventually selected.

"One thing I know for sure", I told them, "there is no way on earth that the Kennedy head can travel as fast as a bullet".

I decided to have it abscond through a tiny hole, because a bigger bullet hole ruins the carefully constructed "Herrera Effect": You need some sort of disk to pull (not push!) the body of a grownup and make it airborne.

-Ramon

Edited by Ramon F. Herrera
##### Share on other sites

We don't know what kind of bullet hit JFK in the head, but [...]

Ollie: We know something critically important, though! We know that the fatal shot bullet was NOT explosive (or soft point). See evidence here:

FF to minute 7:00"

Therefore, one of the main Posner absurdities ("exploding bullet") goes straight to hell, and its author with it.

-Ramon

Edited by Ramon F. Herrera
##### Share on other sites

We don't know what kind of bullet hit JFK in the head, but [...]

Ollie: We know something critically important, though! We know that the fatal shot bullet was NOT explosive (soft point). See evidence here:

FF to minute 7:00"

Therefore, one of the main Posner absurdities ("explosive bullet") goes straight to hell, and its author with it.

-Ramon

Ramon

That is the most ridiculous video I have ever seen, and it does not surprise me that Gary Mack had a part in it. I have shot many deer in my life, many of those head shots with soft point bullets, and I have NEVER seen a deer's head completely disintegrate like that from being hit with a soft point bullet. Even hollow point bullets will not have that kind of an effect.

You are barking up the wrong tree, and have a LOT to learn about bullets and ballistics.

P.S.

Since when did soft point bullets start being referred to as "explosive" bullets?

Edited by Robert Prudhomme

### Announcements

×

• #### Store

×
• Create New...