Proof he's innocent in deflategate.

The math proves Brady is innocent.

T1 = 70F = 294K
Locker-room temp was maintained at 71-74F as per the HVAC system settings (this can be found in Wells' report).
T2 = 50F = 283K
Widely reported game temperature, Wells' report goes as low as 48F.
P1 = 12.5psig = 27.2psia.
Gauge pressure + atmospheric pressure (14.7psi) = absolute pressure.

Use Gay-Lussac's law (P/T = k)
P2 = (P1*T2)/T1 = (27.2*283)/294 = 26.2psia
26.2psia - 14.7psi = 11.5psig.

Doesn't even include the rain, which causes another .2 - 4psi drop.

What did the 11 Pats' footballs average at halftime per the logo gauge? 11.49psig. What was the average measurement of Jackson's intercepted ball as measured by NFL Exec James Daniel using Jastremski's gauge? 11.52psig.

Check figure 22 from Exponent's appendix in Wells' report. http://i62.tinypic.com/9htipt.jpg
It shows how the pressure of a cold ball in a warm room rises over time. This explains why the Colts' footballs appeared to have experienced a lesser pressure drop than the Pats'. The Pats' were measured, then inflated, then the Colts' were measured. This means when the Pats' were measured, the temperature of the air inside was colder than when the Colts' were measured.

This is mathematical proof that the halftime pressures were what they should have been. That no deflation could possibly have occurred in the bathroom. If they were deflated in there, the average pressure would have been more like 11.0psig.

If my say-so isn't enough, look at articles by
Drew Fustin. http://drewfustin.com/deflategate/
Michael Naughton. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/24/basic-physics-may-defeat-deflategate.html
Dale Syphers. http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/new-england-patriots-tom-brady-deflategate-scientist-050715
HeadSmart Labs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxsXFX3tDpg http://www.sporttechie.com/2015/01/31/headsmart-labs-study-scientifically-demystifies-deflategate/
Robert F. Sekerka https://www.elsevier.com/connect/can-physics-explain-the-deflation-of-nfl-footballs
If THAT'S not enough, I'm sure you can find some more saying the same thing if you care to look. You may ask 'Why didn't Wells find what they did?' it's because he/Exponent concluded, with rather poor reasoning (section VIIB, exemplar/master gauge stuff), that ref Walt Anderson must have been wrong about which gauge he used pre-game. The gauge Walt says he used measures about .3-.45psi higher than the non-logo gauge.

You may wish to counter 'Bill Nye says otherwise' well, no, Nye only did a squeeze test, because when he made his vid it was still believed that D'Qwell Jackson said the ball he intercepted felt soft, he later cleared it up and said he noticed no such thing. Nye didn't measure the cold footballs. What he did do though, is prove that it makes sense Brady wouldn't have noticed the balls were underinflated. Brady is actually used to a range of pressures, as is every QB. Every 20F difference in pressure results in a 1psi difference. Some games are played in 80F weather, some at below freezing. Extreme cold tends to harden the leather of a ball, which would offset any underinflated feeling. No one is playing with a ball at 12.5-13.5psig every game.

I will now address a couple other predictable replies:

'the deflator' Was only used once, and it was in May, which is the off-season, months after McNally would have had any footballs to deflate and months before he would again. It was used in a conversation that had nothing to do with football.
There was another text sent by McNally to Jastremski, which read "deflate and give somebody that jacket" sent during a Pats@Packers game after McNally (only works home games) saw Jastremski on TV, on the sideline wearing a thick jacket and holding another. This clearly demonstrates a different meaning for the word, one that has nothing to do with air pressure. In this case, connecting 'the deflator' text with illegal deflation is just a case of confirmation bias.

'why did he destroy his phone?' Why shouldn't he have destroyed his phone? Wells told Brady "Keep the phone." "I don't think it undermines in any way the conclusions of the report." Wells did not want the phone. Brady's lawyers said it would not be needed for an investigation. Any evidence on it would exist on other people's phones and the phone company database. The NFL went through the phones of McNally, Jastremski, and Belichick and found nothing conclusive. Brady also offered Goodell a list of people he had talked to on it so they could get communications from the phone company - but Goodell declined, saying it was 'impractical.'
The phone would never have proved anything anyway. If Brady were guilty, he would have deleted evidence first.
So innocent or guilty, nothing would be found, and many would just assume he deleted any evidence. You CAN delete stuff from phones/computers so they are not retrievable, there are file shredding apps.

'fumble stuff since 06 rule change' Even if you deflate a 12.5psig football by .5psi, that's only a ~2% difference (.5/27.2), do you think 2% less pressure makes a ball unfumbleable? No way.
The 2006 rule determined what teams could do to prepare footballs before they're inspected, for example rubbing them down with rags and brushes and chemicals, to remove the "waxy, slippery sheen" which sounds much more likely to reduce fumbles than 2% less pressure possibly could. Why wait for a rule that merely allows you to rub down footballs a certain way pre-inspection before you decided to illegally deflate them after inspection? That wouldn't make any sense.

'They have a history of cheating.' Not really. The only actual rule they broke was in spygate. It's actually 100% legal to film and steal opponents' signals and always has been. The Pats just did it from the sideline, which was not allowed, it's an arbitrary technicality.
Either way, the result is the same; the opposing team's signals are acquired.
Doing it legally, from the press box, would be better anyway since the press box is higher and provides a better vantage point. The Pats made a mistake that gave them no advantage over doing it the legal way. How is it cheating if you don't even get an edge?


Well, I know even all this won't sway everyone. There are reasonable people who base their beliefs on facts, and there are unreasonable people who base their beliefs on bias and emotion. I'm sure there will be some 'TL;DR' schmucks who are just stubborn and want to stick to their original stance no matter what... there's no helping such people.