Home / ComeDonChisciotte / Simple Math demonstrate that the Official 9/11 Account is a Fabrication

Simple Math demonstrate that the Official 9/11 Account is a Fabrication

by Elias Davidsson

The term “official 9/11 account” refers to the account of the events of
Sept. 11, 2001, as
presented in June 2004 by the Commission of Inquiry appointed by
President George W. Bush, and complemented by other official documents
issued by US government agencies. This account includes various
details, such
as identities of the alleged hijackers, identities of aircraft,
timelines and other data used to prove that the crime of 9/11 was
perpetrated by the named individuals under the orders or the
inspiration of Osama bin
Laden and other al Qaeda leaders.

It can be demonstrated by two straightforward mathematical techniques
that the official acccount on 9/11 is simply not true.

The first method uses boolean algebra. The
other method is based on probability theory.
Boolean algebra used to invalidate the official 9/11 account

Boolean algebra deals not with numbers but with truth values. In
Boolean mathematics we have
only two values: True and false. One of the primary operations in
boolean algebra is the operator AND. In the equation
A AND B we have:

Given A = true and B = true, then
A AND B = true
Given A = true and B = false, then A AND B
= false
Given A = false and B = true, then A AND B = false
Given A = false and B = false, then A AND B = false

>

The AND relationship can be illustrated by three bulbs connected in
series. The truth value for
each bulb is ON or OFF. In order for bulb C to be ON, both A and
B must be ON. If either A or B or both are OFF, C will not obtain
electrical current and be OFF. The same would apply to a longer
series
of bulbs connected in series.

Applying the AND relationship to the official 9/11 account, we posit
that

in order for the official account to be true, a number N of
fundamental allegations must be proved
as true. If any one of these fundamental allegations are false,
the entire official account is false.

Thus, it is only necessary to demonstrate that a single fundamental
allegation in the official
account is false for the entire account to be deemed false. Fundamental
allegations include the following (a non-exhaustive list), all of which
are part of the official version on 9/11:

1. No plans existed
prior to 9/11 to protect the Pentagon and the White House against
approaching aircraft (if such plans actually existed, questions would
arise why they were not implemented and who prevented their
implementation).
2.
The idea that the World Trade Center could be attacked from air, did
not occur to any US government agency before 9/11 (if it is shown that
the idea actually was discussed by US military agencies, the question
would
arise why it was not taken into consideration to protect these assets).
3. All persons named by the FBI as hijackers actually boarded the four
aircraft which crashed on 11 Sep. 2001 (if they did not board the
aircraft, the hijackings could not have taken place).
4. The planes which crashed on 11 Sep. 2001 were flight number AA11
(tail number N334AA), flight number AA77 (tail number N644AA), flight
number UA93 (tail number
N591UA) and flight number UA175 (tail number N612UA) (if the flight and
tail number are not those listed here, the question arises whether the
planes that allegedly crashed at the known locations were the same ones
which
departed from the listed airports).
5. Flight AA11, a Boeing 767, left from Logan Airport, Boston,
and crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York
(some critical assumptions made in the
official story rely on the identity of this flight number, the airport
of departure and on the type of aircraft).
6. Flight AA77, a Boeing 757, left from Dulles Airport,
Washington, D.C., and crashed into the
Pentagon in Washington, D.C. (some critical assumptions made in the
official story rely on the identity of this flight number, the airport
of departure, the type of aircraft and the claim that this aircraft
crashed on
the Pengaton).
7. Flight UA175, a Boeing 767, left from Logan Airport, Boston,
and crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York
(some critical assumptions made in the official story rely on
the identity of this flight number, the airport of departure and on the
type of aircraft.
8. Flight UA93, a Boeing 757, left from Newark Airport and
crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania (some
critical assumptions made in the official story rely on the identity of
this flight number, the airport of departure and on the type of
aircraft).
9. The US military were not notified in time to scramble
military jets and prevent the crashes of the hijacked aircraft (had
they been notified in time, questions would arise why they did not
scramble military jets in time and who was negligent).
10. President George
W. Bush did not know that “America was under attack” before entering
the primary school in Florida on the morning of 9/11 (should it
transpire that President Bush actually knew what was going on in New
York as he
entered the school, questions would arise as to his foreknowledge of
the crime).
11. The South and North towers of the World Trade Center as well
as WTC no. 7 collapsed due to fire (if evidence can be produced
that steel buildings cannot be made to collapse by fire, it would
suggest that they were made to collapse by explosives, as actually
suggested by a number of witnesses).
12. Numerous calls from hijacked
passengers were made to family members and airline personnel with cell
phones (if it can be shown that at the particular moment of the phone
calls the planes were flying above 8,000 feet and/or at the speed of
500 miles
per hour or more, it would suggest that the cellphone stories are a
fabrication, because of the technical high improbability of succeeding
such calls from high altitude and/or high speed).

If any one of the above
allegations is found to be false, the official account must be put in
doubt or rejected and the suggestion of official deception or criminal
complicity must be considered as justified.

Probability theory used
to invalidate the official 9/11 account

It is also possible to “disprove” the official 9/11 account by using
probability theory. If it is shown that the probability of the official
account is so low as to
approach zero, it can be safely maintained that the official account is
untrue.

The probability of a compound event to have occurred is the product of
all sub-events necessary to accomplish the compound
event. The underlying assumption is that the probability of each
sub-event is independent of the probability of another sub-event.
The following sub-events appear independent of each other. All of
them
have a low to extremly low probability. In order to
simplify the demonstration, we arbitrarily assigned a probability of
0.1 (or 10 percent) to each of the following selected propositions
which underpin the
official account. Skeptics may try other combinations of probabilities,
higher or lower, in order to test the methodology.

1. Four young, healthy and educated Muslims who possess large
chunks of cash
and like to party, can be expected to prepare for many months to
sacrifice their lives in a murderous hijacking operation.

2. Four groups of Muslims can be expected to board four different
aircraft in the
United States on the same day without raising suspicion.

3. Young muslim men, known to have been in Afghanistan, would be
expected to receive a visa to the United States in order to learn to
fly.

4.
Foreign Muslims who plan to hijack planes in the United States, can be
expected to choose to train in US, rather than Arab, flight schools in
order to prepare their hijackings.

5. A person planning a hijack
operation in the US could be expected to tell an official US employee
about his criminal motives, as Mohamed Atta had reportedly done in his
encounter with Johnelle Bryant of the Agricultural Department in
Florida.

6.
Muslims who meticulously plan a hijacking operation in the United
States, could be expected to “forget” a Kor’an on a bar stool on the
eve of their operation and a flight manual in Arabic on the morning of
their operation, in a rented car left near the airport from which they
intended to hijack a plane.

7. Hijackers can be expected to fly from another town to the
airport from which they intend to commit the
hijacking operation merely two hours before their intended hijacking
should start.

8. US military authorities can be expected to schedule, for
exactly the date of the murderous events, war games and
exercises including simulated plane hijackings and planes crashing on
government buildings.

9. Conversations from cell phones made from passenger aircraft can be
expected to function at any altitude and speed.

10.
Passports of hijackers could be expected to be found on the crash
sites, regardless of the lack of bodies and wreckage.

11. The US air force could be expected to bungle its attempts to
intercept the
hijacked planes.

12. No plans could have existed at the Pentagon to protect US
government buildings against the risk of an accidental or malicious
plane crash.

13. Neither the CIA nor the FBI
could have any prior knowledge of the identities and whereabouts of the
alleged hijackers before 9/11.

14. A law enforcement authority, such as the FBI, could be
expected to show little interest in
investigating mass murder.

15. A government would be expected to oppose an investigation of
a terrorist attack against its own country.

16. Terrorists can be expected to commit mass murder
without making any demands.

17. Five individuals with only packing knives can be expected to
overwhelm fifty adults in a plane.

18. Hijackers in three different planes can be expected to
successfully enter the pilot cabin without raising alarm.

19. A person who had never flown a Boeing passanger jet could be
expected after a little simulator training to plunge the aircraft
successfully
between the first and second floor of the side of the Pentagon, even
under conditions of extreme stress.

20. A crashed plane can be expected to leave any visible trace.

21. A high rise steel
building can be expected to collapse on its own footprint after a
raging fire.

22. Debris from a crashed plane can be expected to be found many
miles from the crash site.

The compound probability of
the above events is the product of the individual probabilities or
0.1**22 (0.1 in the 22 exponential). The actual figure is so small that
it practically nears zero.

If one accepts the above propositions (even by
increasing their probability of occurrence to 0,5), it follows that
their compound probability is near zero. In fact, it suffices
that a subset of the above propositions be shown to have a compound
probability of
near zero, to invalidate the official account on 9/11.

While both methods demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that the U.S.
authorities have fabricated the official account, the question arises
why they have
done so, what are they covering up, who perpetrated the mass murder of
9/11 and how was it accomplished. These questions are not pursued
further here. As long as the above statements of fact are
not
fully investigated, the U.S. administration must be considered as
covering up the crime and thus as the prime suspect in this crime
against humanity.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the
author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research
on Globalization.

The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DAV504A.html
29 April 2005
© Copyright belongs to the author 2005.

Pubblicato da Truman