No. That math I did showed that there was conservation of momentum during the collapse. Since Newton's 3rd law is actually based on the law of conservation of momentum, we can safely say that anything that does not violate the law of conservation of momentum also does not violate Newton's 3rd law. Since my math showed that the collapse does not violate the law of conservation of momentum, we can see that Chandler's claim that it violates Newton's 3rd law is simply wrong.
How does Bazant's math not violate conservation of momentum? If you don't moind explaining this to me again. I seem to have missed it the first time around.