The third is a basic hurdle in failure analysis, which made it difficult to clarify cause.

Although the report could clearly point out that it lacked scientific rationality, it was asked what the true cause was, and it was a no-idea, and it remained impossible to come up with a counter-proposal.

The reason why no one could come up with a counter-proposal was that no one could immediately find a convenient mechanism for the momentary outflow of air in the cabin to stop immediately after the outflow or be sufficiently suppressed.

Unless a logical alternative can be shown, it has long been impossible to denounce the report's conclusions simply by arguing that the report's conclusions are not convincing.

I found a mechanism to stop the flow of air in the relationship between the lemonade bottle and the enclosed marble. The round marble keeps its outer circumference in close contact with the inner wall to prevent gas leakage.

The diameter of the rear part of the fuselage is deflated toward the rear, and when pressure is applied to the pressure bulkhead, the bulkhead itself does not shift backward and blow off. In other words, it works in the direction of suppressing air leakage.
This awareness brought the elimination of emptiness in me in an instant.

According to the Jikusen theory, the outer peripheral part of the pressure bulkhead and the outer plate of fuselage was partially peeled off to create a gap, and an air leak occurred. I conclude that it became.

The location of the gap inferred from the drawing data in the report coincides with the ceiling rupture position near the top of the rear R-5 door as confirmed by the cabin crew.