Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Hi again Chris,

 

I am finding your research and information riveting. I suspect the work of Luis Alvarez is not high on your list of useful sources, but his film analysis is very interesting when you overcome the 'jet effect' aversion that many would have to it. This post has two parts :

Both parts are based on Alvarez's article -  "A Physicist Examines the Kennedy Assassination Film"- Luis W Alvarez.

 

image.png.e57df99e2ec14fce43b1ca12269b205f.png

image.png.b0fccc04397dff804a6bc9ace1c8f93d.png

image.png.fcae323aba97ff15753833eaca342ae0.png

The chart above fairly accurately shows the point where the limo brakes. Alvarez does not consider braking as an option. Bearing in mind he is viewing the extant film, he sees a change in speed from 12mph to 8 mph. He states the car then continues at 8 mph until past frame extant Z334, and accepts this conflicts with Kellerman's testimony. My question from this is ; When did the limo accelerate? Can this be determined from Wiegman combined with Zapruder? (or anything else?). How long after Z334 did Kellerman trundle along at 8mph? I don't believe Kellerman did dawdle, I think the steady speed is an artifact.

My second point may only be of interest to a few, but the rate at which Zapruder's camera is purported to have run at is very important. Alvarez has proposed an elegant(ish) proof that it ran at 18.3 fps. Is anyone willing to consider and rebut the proof below?

image.png.d1437543b1b33cdcfac7f1d54dce58fe.png

image.thumb.png.0eebf9d1e2637ba82ffca6024c53f1d4.png

 

Sorry this is long.

Edited by Eddy Bainbridge
Error of fact
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 204
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 5/9/2020 at 1:49 AM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

An article by a Mr Kelleher. His conclusions are based on the Z film and aren't robust, but his method of analysis (assessment of human reactions) Appears very good. Do his reaction points match your conclusions on synching? From your previous work I know you have looked at the possibility of a later shot than Z313. 

Eddy, here are a few of my comments in red:

“8. Who did it? – Kelleher concludes that Lee Harvey Oswald did all the shooting and scored a very lucky hit with his final shot:
I disagree. But my topic is not about the shooter, so I’ll reserve more comments.
Applying this simple scientific principle in carefully examining frames 133 through 350 of the Zapruder film, it is plainly obvious to an objective observer with a sharp eye for detail that three bullets traveling at supersonic speed entered the presidential limo accompanied by their shock-wave noise at Zapruder frames Z222, Z313 and Z331 (plus or minus a Z frame) and that there were no other shots.
In March 1979, using a rifle identical to Oswald's, a government investigator who had no formal training using any type of firearm, was able to operate the bolt, aim and fire in 1.2 seconds.”

If he wants to delay where the excising of frames occurred to approx z301 and start from there that’s fine with me.
In fact, that would give a shooter enough time between these (313-331) shots.
But, one reason the hair flap shot had to be ignored was the total shots dilemma.

“I found the visual-shot-identifier evidence lying dormant in the three key motion-picture sequences taken of the presidential limo under fire: the famous Abraham Zapruder, Orville Nix and Marie Muchmore films. I found confirming visual-shot-identifier evidence in two lesser-known motion pictures after syncing them with the Zapruder film: the Elsie Dorman and Dave Wiegman assassination sequences. These last two films captured the spectators lining either side of Elm Street in front of the TSBD as the three shots rang out. The visual shot-identifiers in the Dorman and Wiegman films additionally provide compelling scientific proof that all three shots came from the TSBD.”
Since I’m not privy to the actual material(quality thereof) he used to justify his conclusions, I’ll stick with the Z/Wiegman frame syncs using Wiegman as the master time clock.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

The chart above fairly accurately shows the point where the limo brakes. Alvarez does not consider braking as an option. Bearing in mind he is viewing the extant film, he sees a change in speed from 12mph to 8 mph. He states the car then continues at 8 mph until past frame extant Z334, and accepts this conflicts with Kellerman's testimony. My question from this is ; When did the limo accelerate? Can this be determined from Wiegman combined with Zapruder? (or anything else?). How long after Z334 did Kellerman trundle along at 8mph? I don't believe Kellerman did dawdle, I think the steady speed is an artifact.

My second point may only be of interest to a few, but the rate at which Zapruder's camera is purported to have run at is very important. Alvarez has proposed an elegant(ish) proof that it ran at 18.3 fps. Is anyone willing to consider and rebut the proof below?

 

 

 

 

Too many official studies on a film which is faulty(missing frames) to begin with.

Compare the Alvarez study with the previous Itek study I provided and note the differences in frame# related to limo speed and the speed bump up/down from z289-z293

I previously provided a frame rate scenario which includes18.3fps and the missing frames taking the Z/Wiegman syncs into consideration.

The extant film from z133-z318@18.3 fps =10.1seconds
Missing frames 38 = 2.076 seconds
Z318-Z447 = 129Z frames / 7.666seconds = 16.82fps
Z447-Z486 = 39Z frames/16.82fps = 2.318seconds
Total time 22.16seconds

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2020 at 8:17 AM, Chris Davidson said:

Part 2 continuation:

Greer hit the brakes hard, probably stopped instantaneously then rolled on.

Z280 + 38 = z318 + 38 missing frames = remove every other frame to double speed of limo on film.

From Z280-Z301(21 x 2 frames = 42 real frames) the limo speed would have actually been 9.71mph/2 = 4.85mph

4.85mph@18.3fps = .39ft per frame x 42 frames = 16.38ft

From Z301-Z318(17 x 2 = 34 real frames) the limo speed would have actually been 7.47mph/2 = 3.74mph

In this part of the analysis I feel you are giving an overly coarse assessment of the limo speeds. To me the significance is that you suggest even frame removal to reach the speed results. Even frame removal wouldn't hide acceleration, and in the time period you analyse it still hides a stop (deceleration). 

A hugely powerful car, even in the sixties could probably accelerate from 0-60mph in six seconds. So very very roughly could be hitting 20mph in 2 seconds. A car with powerful brakes could stop from 10 mph in under a second. I think I am being unfair at this point in the analysis but I find the idea of even frame removal inconsistent with other evidence. 

Edited by Eddy Bainbridge
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

In this part of the analysis I feel you are giving an overly coarse assessment of the limo speeds. To me the significance is that you suggest even frame removal to reach the speed results. Even frame removal wouldn't hide acceleration, and in the time period you analyse it still hides a stop (deceleration). 

A hugely powerful car, even in the sixties could probably accelerate from 0-60mph in six seconds. So very very roughly could be hitting 20mph in 2 seconds. A car with powerful brakes could stop from 10 mph in under a second. I think I am being unfair at this point in the analysis but I find the idea of even frame removal inconsistent with other evidence. 

I agree. I was putting that in a continuous moving limo scenario with it not necessarily completely stopping.  

Below could be more likely because the .3ft per frame limo speed is what was used regarding alteration calculations.

z280-z313 = 23.73ft
21 x 2 = 42 frames
12 x 2 = 24 frames
              66 frames / (23.73-3.93) = 19.8ft = .3ft per frame

Stopping distance @ 9.7mph = 3.93ft

Z280 (441.57)-z301(458.1) = 16.53ft

After instantaneous stop 16.53 - 3.93 = 12.6ft left

4.85mph = .39ft per frame

12.6ft/.39ft per frame = 32.3 frames

42 total - 32.3 + (10 frames car stop or something to this effect)

Stopping-Distance.png

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chris I find your mathematical approach very credible and am puzzled by the lack of posts on this thread. Your understanding of maths is a little daunting, but you aren't receiving rebuttals of the argument, which suggests to me you're making the non-alterationists nervous and the people who realise the significance of this are also nervous.

 

To find out what happened in the missing time is not easy, but I can see some possible avenues where you might find some reference information. Do you find credible the view that the Zapruder film shows a skull fragment shooting almost vertically? That make no sense in the extant film, but is it indicative of the head angle at that point in time? Also we know that Kennedy's head moved at Z312 in reaction to braking, can that head movement be extrapolated into missing frames. It is a suspicion of mine the momentum imparted by any shots is small in comparison with the momentum imparted from the braking, is that right?

Does the missing time give more credibility to the acoustic evidence? If it does, then it can be used the locate shots and thus estimate reactions to momentum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2020 at 6:20 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Mark and others,

This is the first 11 seconds. These are progressive frames only.     I should have said the progressive only frames version was recorded, then converted to FLV format.

Hope that is clear.

I clocked the clocked.

Download is available to anyone interested.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NMjNMhlhWp_PhwfiHsN2SEKDL9mwyxHz/view?usp=sharing

Thanks for the video Chris, it's a very clear version, which is nice to have as a reference.

It has been brought to my attention by a keen eyed researcher that later in the Wiegman film we see a car signalling left to go into Parkland hospital:

Wiegman-Parkland-Car.png

This may be able to help nail down the film recording rate if we can find out the make and model of car.  Presumably the blinking rate would have been fairly constant and predictable, so we can therefore calculate how many frames are required per signal cycle in real time.

Does anyone know what type of car this was?

I extracted the frames from the video and found that there were 25 or 26 broadcast frames per cycle.  As the film was translated from an assumed original 24 FPS to 30 broadcast FPS, we multiply by 0.8 to return to the original Wiegman frame rate, i.e. 25.5*0.8 = 20.4 original Wiegman frames per side turn signal cycle.

If the Wiegman film was recorded at 24 FPS that's 1.18 Hz.
If the Wiegman film was recorded at 30 FPS that's 1.47 Hz.

Frustratingly both are in the range 1-2 Hz as mentioned here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_lighting#Side_turn_signals

However, if we find out what car type it was there should be a way to determine whether it's normal blinking rate was closer to 1.18 Hz or 1.47 Hz, and therefore deduce the correct recording rate of the Wiegman film.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mark Tyler said:

Thanks for the video Chris, it's a very clear version, which is nice to have as a reference.

It has been brought to my attention by a keen eyed researcher that later in the Wiegman film we see a car signalling left to go into Parkland hospital:

Wiegman-Parkland-Car.png

This may be able to help nail down the film recording rate if we can find out the make and model of car.  Presumably the blinking rate would have been fairly constant and predictable, so we can therefore calculate how many frames are required per signal cycle in real time.

Does anyone know what type of car this was?

 

It's either a '63 or '64 Mercury Station Wagon.

Edited by Daniel Rice
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

To find out what happened in the missing time is not easy, but I can see some possible avenues where you might find some reference information. Do you find credible the view that the Zapruder film shows a skull fragment shooting almost vertically? That make no sense in the extant film, but is it indicative of the head angle at that point in time? Also we know that Kennedy's head moved at Z312 in reaction to braking, can that head movement be extrapolated into missing frames. It is a suspicion of mine the momentum imparted by any shots is small in comparison with the momentum imparted from the braking, is that right?

Does the missing time give more credibility to the acoustic evidence? If it does, then it can be used the locate shots and thus estimate reactions to momentum.

Eddy,

The initial scenario I created for the missing time was based on Greer reacting to the hair flap shot.

If Hickey saw it but Greer didn't hear it, I'm fine with that.

This just delays the moment of braking to a different point in the original film.

If as you say,  the braking occurred slightly before or after the extant 313 shot, the excising of frames still exists. As to the exact sequence of that excision, don't have that yet.

The frame extraction sequence will either support or disprove(I believe) the acoustical Don Thomas uses for his last three shot entries.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Below could be more likely because the .3ft per frame limo speed is what was used regarding alteration calculations.

z280-z313 = 23.73ft
21 x 2 = 42 frames
12 x 2 = 24 frames
              66 frames / (23.73-3.93) = 19.8ft = .3ft per frame

Stopping distance @ 9.7mph = 3.93ft

Z280 (441.57)-z301(458.1) = 16.53ft

After instantaneous stop 16.53 - 3.93 = 12.6ft left

4.85mph = .39ft per frame

12.6ft/.39ft per frame = 32.3 frames

42 total - 32.3 + (10 frames car stop or something to this effect)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keeping the above in mind.

There was a true "rate x time=distance" equation before the film was altered. The alteration solution included the consideration of instantaneous .3ft per frame, 38 missing frames and the average speed affect this would have on the original unaltered film. I have pointed out remnants from the alteration solution in the past, just a little more re-enforcement moving forward.

I will now start connecting this with the previous work I have provided.

You can decide for yourself what is fact or fiction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Add 38 frames to the overall span from z161-z313.

That would make the new equation: 152 + 38 = 190frames/136.1ft

136.1ft/190frames = .716ft per frame x 18.3fps = 13.1ft per sec / 1.47 = 8.91mph average

8.91 + 2.24 = 11.15mph

The limo did not travel 2.24 mph from extant z161-z166, it just represented the difference in average speed from z161-z313 when 38 frames were removed from that span.

If you understand this, the remaining remnants will be much easier to grasp.

2.24mph.png

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

 

2.24mph.png

I want to try and explain this post more fully. If Chris Davidson says 'No you idiot' after this post I will have failed.

The chart above is part of a survey carried out to tabulate the Zapruder film with distances in Dealey Plaza. 

If you look at the column 'Station No.' You see a number' which is a surveyed point on Elm Street , the '+' number after it indicates the distance in feet past the surveyed point.

So, At Frame Z161 the survey says the limo was 29.2 ft from station 3. At Frame 166 the limo was 0.9 ft farther on. (At 3+30.1 ft)

We know how fast Zapruder's camera was running at (18.3 frames per second) so Chris has calculated how fast the limo must have been going to travel  0.9 feet in the five frames of film that have passed during the distance travelled. The result of the calculation is that it travelled at 2.24mph.

THIS IS GARBAGE!!!!!! - Of all the estimates of limo speed during this time NOONE suggests it was going that slow.

In Chris's earlier thread (Maths rules) the small bit I understood was that he demonstrated the reason for the FALSIFICATION of the survey results. AND the reason is:

"The limo did not travel 2.24 mph from extant z161-z166, it just represented the difference in average speed from z161-z313 when 38 frames were removed from that span." - C Davidson

 

or in other words - The survey was done with a film that no longer matched the measurements taken. There isn't enough Elm Street between the Surveyed points to model a car moving at reasonably constant speed (Between Z161 and Z313), so the measurements have been fiddled. (There is another copy of the table showing the fiddling, obtained from the surveyor)

 

I hope that explanation is good enough to catch anybody up whose interested.

If it isn't Chris will help.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

I want to try and explain this post more fully. If Chris Davidson says 'No you idiot' after this post I will have failed.

The chart above is part of a survey carried out to tabulate the Zapruder film with distances in Dealey Plaza. 

If you look at the column 'Station No.' You see a number' which is a surveyed point on Elm Street , the '+' number after it indicates the distance in feet past the surveyed point.

So, At Frame Z161 the survey says the limo was 29.2 ft from station 3. At Frame 166 the limo was 0.9 ft farther on. (At 3+30.1 ft)

We know how fast Zapruder's camera was running at (18.3 frames per second) so Chris has calculated how fast the limo must have been going to travel  0.9 feet in the five frames of film that have passed during the distance travelled. The result of the calculation is that it travelled at 2.24mph.

THIS IS GARBAGE!!!!!! - Of all the estimates of limo speed during this time NOONE suggests it was going that slow.

In Chris's earlier thread (Maths rules) the small bit I understood was that he demonstrated the reason for the FALSIFICATION of the survey results. AND the reason is:

"The limo did not travel 2.24 mph from extant z161-z166, it just represented the difference in average speed from z161-z313 when 38 frames were removed from that span." - C Davidson

or in other words - The survey was done with a film that no longer matched the measurements taken. There isn't enough Elm Street between the Surveyed points to model a car moving at reasonably constant speed (Between Z161 and Z313), so the measurements have been fiddled. (There is another copy of the table showing the fiddling, obtained from the surveyor)

I hope that explanation is good enough to catch anybody up whose interested.

If it isn't Chris will help.

 

 

Eddy, you are far from idiotic, don't even think that.

Your synopsis was fine.

I appreciate your input/incite and interest.

This is not easy to comprehend all at once.

That dealt with the average speed change when the 38 missing frames were included.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...