WM,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > ......./\E
> > > ...../ c.\
> > > F / .......\
> > >
> > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > >
> > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

WM the geometry failure spamming sci.math for 15 years 505 "Question on Hilbert's Hotel" when the idiot WM needs to research slant cut of cone is Oval, never his mindless ellipse
> William 442 "Questions..."
> > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > 
> > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > ......./\E
> > > ...../ c.\
> > > F / .......\
> > >
> > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > >
> > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > >
> > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > >
> > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > >
> > >
> > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > >
> > >
> > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > fails at math and science:
> > >
> > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > >
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > >
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > >
> > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > >
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > fails at math and science:
> > >
> > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"bozo"
> > > > fails at math and science:
> > > >"psychoceramic"
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"physics hater"
> > > > tarded:
> > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > >
> > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > >
> > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > >
> > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > math
> > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Sergi_o,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > ......./\E
> > > ...../ c.\
> > > F / .......\
> > >
> > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > >
> > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.
> > >

Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> William 442 "Questions..."
> > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > 
> > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > ......./\E
> > > ...../ c.\
> > > F / .......\
> > >
> > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > >
> > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > >
> > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > >
> > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > >
> > >
> > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > >
> > >
> > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > >
> > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > fails at math and science:
> > >
> > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > >
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > >
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > >
> > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > >
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > fails at math and science:
> > >
> > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"bozo"
> > > > fails at math and science:
> > > >"psychoceramic"
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"physics hater"
> > > > tarded:
> > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > >
> > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > >
> > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > >
> > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > math
> > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Peter Sollich,Fritz Feldhase,Andreas Tilgner,Cynthia A. Volkert,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > ......./\E
> > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > F / .......\
> > > >
> > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > >
> > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.
> > > >
Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > 
> > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > ......./\E
> > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > F / .......\
> > > >
> > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > >
> > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > >
> > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > >
> > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > >
> > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > >
> > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > >
> > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > tarded:
> > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > >
> > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you..
> > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > >
> > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

William,Andreas Tilgner,Cynthia A. Volkert,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > F / .......\
> > > > >
> > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > >
> > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

William 37 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > F / .......\
> > > > >
> > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > >
> > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > >
> > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > >
> > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Phil Carmody,Jörg Enderlein,Laurent Gizon,Ariane Frey,Andreas Tilgner,Cynthia A. Volkert,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > >
> > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A.. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > >
> > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki....@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > >
> > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus..
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse..
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Chris Thomasson,Gerd Binnig,Horst Ludwig Stormer,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

fredag 13 januari 2023 kl. 06:03:49 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> Chris Thomasson,Gerd Binnig,Horst Ludwig Stormer,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.
> Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius
why don't you just ask WM nicely if he'll do what you want? Maybe he will fuck you in the ass like you want?

On 1/13/2023 3:11 AM, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> fredag 13 januari 2023 kl. 06:03:49 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
>> Chris Thomasson,Gerd Binnig,Horst Ludwig Stormer,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schu

> why don't you just ask WM nicely if he'll do what you want? Maybe he will fuck you in the ass like you want?

Wow, AP wants WM to fuck him in the ass? We all know AP is gay, but really!

Gus Gassmann,Horst Ludwig Stormer,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Fritz Feldhase,Horst Ludwig Stormer,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

William,Andreas Tilgner,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

William 223 "Who recognizes..."
> Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> > Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on....."
> > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers...."
> > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers...."
> > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Sergi,Andreas Tilgner,Peter Grunberg,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Sergi 236 "Who recognizes..."
> William 223 "Who recognizes..."
> > Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> > > Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > > > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on....."
> > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar...."
> > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar...."
> > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner..
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

FromTheRafters,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

FromTheRafters 518 "Question on Hilbert.."
> Sergi 236 "Who recognizes..."
> > William 223 "Who recognizes..."
> > > Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > > > > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > > > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures..
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Chris Thomasson,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Anja Karliczek,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Chris Thomasson 37 "Equal Rights"
> FromTheRafters 518 "Question on Hilbert.."
> > Sergi 236 "Who recognizes..."
> > > William 223 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > > Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > > > > > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > > > > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Jim Burns,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Jim Burns 274 "Who recognizes.. dark numbers"
> Chris Thomasson 37 "Equal Rights"
> > FromTheRafters 518 "Question on Hilbert.."
> > > Sergi 236 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > William 223 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > > Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > > > Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > > > > > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed..
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Sergi,Susanne Schneider,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Steffen Schumann,Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another feature of spammers, often many are fake names such as Michael Moroney and when they dream up their fake name, they often, not always start the name with the same letters-- being stupid and being lazy. So that Fritz Feldhase and Gus Gassmann and Ben Bacarisse we have to question if they are real names or just WM under a fake name making it look as if his thread is lively.

Sergi 307 "Who recognize.."
> Jim Burns 274 "Who recognizes.. dark numbers"
> > Chris Thomasson 37 "Equal Rights"
> > > FromTheRafters 518 "Question on Hilbert.."
> > > > Sergi 236 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > > William 223 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 210 "Who recognizes..."
> > > > > > > Gus Gassmann 164 "Who recognizes... dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 28 "Equal Rights"
> > > > > > > > > Phil Carmody 94 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 31 "Who recognizes...dark numbers"
> > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 535 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > William 442 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jim Burns 267 "Questions..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 264 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 260 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fritz Feldhase 229 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters 224 "Questions...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris Thomasson 166 "Questions on..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 71, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WM,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Metin Tolan,Anja Karliczek,apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider,Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann,Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert are they forever going to be mindless idiots of math especially geometry.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > entrance E of planar cut, and "c" the center axis, and F the exit of planar cut, cF is far larger than Ec.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are they trying to turn sci.math into a gay pick up bar rather than legitimate math with endless day after day spam?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 68, "Questions on...."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang Mueckenheim 324 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the fine Bacarisse cheese
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 323 "Three proofs of dark numbers..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FromTheRafters (more like gutters) 221 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sergi_o 161 "Two similar..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben Bacarisse 133, "Two similar properties..."
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WM turning Gottingen Germany into geometry failures.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo chasing corpses in WM gay pick up bar, for Kibo sure does not know the difference between Oval and ellipse as seen in his latest stupidity-- a revolving axis as Kibo the moron and BWR describes it--
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 1:48:16 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/5/2022 12:22 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 8:19 PM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On 12/4/2022 7:43 PM, Mathin3D wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Serious Question:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr. Hau.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why Kibo??? Because she refuses to finish her experiment and see all the light vanishes simultaneously, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2022 at 12:21:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Imp of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, January 18, 2021 at 2:06:24 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By Michael Moroney 1/23/18, 44 posts 461 views
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 9:13:14 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"Court Jester of Math"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kibo,is Ruth Charney of AMS the model in your book, for she cannot admit the slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse as proven by AP in 2016? I know it falls on deaf ears of Kibo with his 938 is 12% short of 945. And Ruth, would the AMS publish Kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945, because the AMS certainly will not publish AP's conic proof? Maybe that is all the AMS publishes-- fake math.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 3:21:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 12:43:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"bozo"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fails at math and science:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"psychoceramic"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >"physics hater"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tarded:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No wonder Dr.Tao is a failed mathematician who cannot see that |/\| planar cut simultaneously through cylinder and cone has to yield a Oval in cone, a ellipse in cylinder. Tao fails fails fails math, and no wonder the nitwit cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 6:19:00 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/4/2022 5:52 PM, bwr fml wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:39:25 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> And here you can plainly see the side EC is smaller than CF, while a ellipse requires them to be equal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ......./\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../ c.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> F / .......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you are thinking your cone is symmetric around the z axis and the point c is on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then you claim that Ec is less than cF is true.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And that means absolutely nothing about whether the intersection of the cone and plane is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The fundamental crank mistake you made a decade ago is thinking that the point c on the z axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has ANYTHING to do with whether the intersection is an ellipse or not.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I clearly showed a couple of days ago, the algebra CLEARLY shows that your point c needs to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > exactly half way between the point E and the point F. Then the distances Ec and cF are equal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BUT, far more important, all the widths of the intersection in that plane for any distance d to the left
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the distance d to the right of that point c are then precisely equal and that is the definition
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of a plane of symmetry and the intersection is an ellipse.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But you have screeched your false claim out your crank hole for long enough and you DESPERATELY
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > need to imagine that you are right and everyone else in the history of the world is wrong... that you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > probably can't ever admit that you made this mistake and just keep screeching it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go out in your yard and scream it loud and proud:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RETARDED, RETARDED, ARCHIE IS RETARDED
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and keep crank screaming that until they call the cops on you.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bwr is correct, Archie. Let's try again with your little diagram, fixed.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .......A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ....../.\E
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ...../.C.\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> ..../B....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .../.......\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> .F/....G....\
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You chose point C to be the intersection of line segment EF and the axis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the cone AG. As you say segment EC is smaller than CF. Not in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dispute. But that doesn't show that the intersecting curve isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around EF. C is not the center of EF. To see if the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > intersection figure is symmetric around EF, you obviously have to start
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > at the center, the halfway point of EF. Here I called it B, and the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > length BE = length BF. Now you need to show that the curve is or is not
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > symmetric around B. That the width at B+d is or is not = the width at
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B-d, as bwr stated. Not quite as simple.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AP comments: so look at the moron Moroney (Kibo Parry) being a spokesperson for failed Dr. Tao with his "move around axis of the cone-- say Kibo and Tao is there a witch flying around on a broomstick in that cone also???
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Universitat Augsburg, Germany, rector Sabine Doering-Manteuffel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Math dept Ronald H.W.Hoppe, B. Schmidt, Sarah Friedrich, Stefan Grosskinsky, Friedrich Pukelsheim, Mirjam Dur, Ralf Werner.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hochschule Augsburg, Wolfgang Mueckenheim
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dorothea Bahns, Laurent Bartholdi, Valentin Blomer, Jorg Brüdern, Stefan Halverscheid, Harald Andres Helfgott, Madeleine Jotz Lean, Ralf Meyer, Preda Mihailescu, Walther Dietrich Paravicini, Viktor Pidstrygach, Thomas Schick, Evelina Viada, Ingo Frank Witt, Chenchang Zhu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal-September.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wolfgang M. Weyand
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Berliner Strasse
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bad Homburg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Goethe Universitat Physics dept
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Brigitta Wolff president
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jurgen Habermass
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Stocker
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gerd Binnig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Horst Ludwig Stormer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter Grunberg
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > math
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex Kuronya
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin Moller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob Stix
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Annette Werner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andreas Bernig
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Esther Cabezas-Rivas
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans Crauel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Gerstner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bastian von Harrach
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thomas Mettler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tobias Weth
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Amin Coja-Oghlan
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Raman Sanyal
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thorsten Theobald
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yury Person
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gottingen Univ physics
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Karsten Bahr
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Bloechl
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bodenschatz
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Laura Covi, PhD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Dillmann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Dreizler
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jörg Enderlein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Laurent Gizon
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Glatzel
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Fabian Heidrich-Meisner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Hans Christian Hofsäss
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Janshoff
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christian Jooß
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Klumpp
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Sarah Köster
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Reiner Kree
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Matthias Krüger
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stanley Lai
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Stefan Mathias
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Vasile Mosneaga
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Marcus Müller
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Astrid Pundt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Arnulf Quadt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Ansgar Reiners
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Angela Rizzi
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Claus Ropers
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Tim Salditt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Konrad Samwer
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Christoph Schmidt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Susanne Schneider
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Steffen Schumann
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Simone Techert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > apl. Prof. Dr. Michael Seibt
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Peter Sollich
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Andreas Tilgner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Cynthia A. Volkert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Florentin Wörgötter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prof. Dr. Annette Zippelius

Fabian Heidrich-Meisner,Hans Christian Hofsäss,Andreas Janshoff,Christian Jooß, WM, William, Chris Thomasson

WM's profile photo
WM
unread,
Who recognizes these true pioneers of dark numbers?
On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 3:43:08 PM UTC-4, WM wrote: > William schrieb am Samstag, 28.
2:37 PM

WM's profile photo
WM
, …
Chris M. Thomasson
760
unread,
Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
On 1/28/2023 3:27 AM, WM wrote: > Chris M. Thomasson schrieb am Samstag, 28.. Januar 2023 um 05:25:
2:13 PM

Dan Christensen's profile photo
Dan Christensen
, …
Mostowski Collapse
3 unread,
STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim

Stefan Kehrein,Stefan Klumpp,Sarah Köster,Reiner Kree,Matthias Krüger,Stanley Lai
1> WM's profile photo
2> WM
3> unread,
4> Who recognizes these true pioneers of dark numbers?
5> On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 3:43:08 PM UTC-4, WM wrote: > William schrieb am Samstag, 28.
> 2:37 PM
> 
> WM's profile photo
> WM
> , …
> Chris M. Thomasson
> 760
> unread,
> Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
> On 1/28/2023 3:27 AM, WM wrote: > Chris M. Thomasson schrieb am Samstag, 28. Januar 2023 um 05:25:
> 2:13 PM
> 
> Dan Christensen's profile photo
> Dan Christensen
> , …
> Mostowski Collapse
> 3
> unread,
> STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim

Annalena Baerbock,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider, no-raone here especially Wolfgang Mueckenheim can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor admit the truth of conics-- slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse, and these fools embrace the error ridden Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, too ignorant to understand Boole screwed up OR with AND truth tables.
unread,
The testimony of unit fractions
On Friday, January 27, 2023 at 6:10:04 AM UTC-4, WM wrote: > Let us denote the Number of Unit
5:48 PM

Dan Christensen's profile photo
Dan Christensen
, …
Jeffrey Rubard
6 unread,
STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science
On Friday, January 27, 2023 at 6:26:13 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > Is Dan Christensen
5:38 PM

WM's profile photo
WM
, …
Jim Burns
527
unread,
Who recognizes these true pioneers of dark numbers?
On 1/28/2023 12:44 PM, WM wrote: > Jim Burns schrieb am Samstag, > 28. Januar 2023 um 15:36:02
5:30 PM

olcott's profile photo
olcott
, …
Richard Damon
116
unread,
HH(PP,PP) correctly determines that its input never halts
On 1/27/2023 10:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 1/27/23 11:14 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 1/27/
5:29 PM

Chris M. Thomasson's profile photo
Chris M. Thomasson
,

6
Re: sickfuck spammers Jim Burns,WM-- never a geometry proof of Fundamental theorem of Calculus, and his mindless Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, and geometry failure who cannot admit slant cut of cone is Oval, not ellipse
5:02 PM

zelos...@gmail.com's profile photo
zelos...@gmail.com
, …

33
Re: Gonna cum in my mouth?
Brigitta Wolff,Jurgen Habermass,Horst Stocker,Gerd Binnig,Horst Ludwig Stormer Stefan Kehrein,Stefan
4:58 PM

zelos...@gmail.com's profile photo
zelos...@gmail.com
, …

65
Re: Wolfgang Mueckenheim fuck my ass!
Stefan Kehrein,Stefan Klumpp,Sarah Köster,Reiner Kree,Matthias Krüger,Stanley Lai 1> WM's
4:30 PM

Horatio Cornholer's profile photo
Horatio Cornholer

3
Re: 2-Dan Christensen on spanking Ruth Charney, Jill Pipher for their failure to admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never the Ellipse. Dan the crazy insane Canadian is into fetishes with his illogic of 2 OR 1=3 with AND as subtraction.Is it Canadian winter

2-Annalena Baerbock,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider, no-raone here especially Wolfgang Mueckenheim can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor admit the truth of conics-- slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse, and these fools embrace the error ridden Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, too ignorant to understand Boole screwed up OR with AND truth tables.

unread,
Who recognizes these true pioneers of dark numbers?
On 1/29/2023 1:29 PM, WM wrote: > Jim Burns schrieb am Sonntag, > 29. Januar 2023 um 00:30:35
2:08 PM

WM's profile photo
WM
, …
Chris M. Thomasson
765
unread,
Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
On 1/28/2023 10:48 PM, Eram semper recta wrote: > On Saturday, 28 January 2023 at 22:13:12 UTC+2,
2:08 PM


> , …
>
> 65
> Re: Wolfgang Mueckenheim fuck my ass!
> Stefan Kehrein,Stefan Klumpp,Sarah Köster,Reiner Kree,Matthias Krüger,Stanley Lai 1> WM's
> 4:30 PM
> 
> Horatio Cornholer's profile photo
> Horatio Cornholer
>
> 3
> Re: 2-Dan Christensen on spanking Ruth Charney, Jill Pipher for their failure to admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never the Ellipse. Dan the crazy insane Canadian is into fetishes with his illogic of 2 OR 1=3 with AND as subtraction.Is it Canadian winter

#5-1, 134th published book

Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.

Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)

#5-2, 45th published

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)

Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science..

Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.

This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.

It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.

Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#15 in General Geometry
#223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

#5-3, 55th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.

Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.

The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.

And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.

But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.

Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.

The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 KB
• Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)

3-Annalena Baerbock,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider, no-raone here especially Wolfgang Mueckenheim can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor admit the truth of conics-- slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse, and these fools embrace the error ridden Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, too ignorant to understand Boole screwed up OR with AND truth tables.
>
WM
FromTheRafters
766
unread,
Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
Chris M. Thomasson formulated on Sunday : > On 1/28/2023 10:48 PM, Eram semper recta wrote: >
4:00 PM

Dan Christensen's profile photo
Dan Christensen
, …
Mostowski Collapse
20
unread,
STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science
On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 3:46:28 PM UTC-5, Mostowski Collapse wrote: > Here is a
3:30 PM


> 
> > , …
> >
> > 65
> > Re: Wolfgang Mueckenheim fuck my ass!
> > Stefan Kehrein,Stefan Klumpp,Sarah Köster,Reiner Kree,Matthias Krüger,Stanley Lai 1> WM's
> > 4:30 PM
> > 
> > Horatio Cornholer's profile photo
> > Horatio Cornholer
> >
> > 3
> > Re: 2-Dan Christensen on spanking Ruth Charney, Jill Pipher for their failure to admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never the Ellipse. Dan the crazy insane Canadian is into fetishes with his illogic of 2 OR 1=3 with AND as subtraction.Is it Canadian winter
> #5-1, 134th published book
>
> Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.
>
> Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> ◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)
>
>
>
> #5-2, 45th published
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)
>
> Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.
>
> Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.
>
> This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.
>
> It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.
>
> Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.
>
>
>
> Product details
> ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
> Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
> Language ‏ : ‎ English
> File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
> Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
> Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> #15 in General Geometry
> #223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
>
>
>
>
> #5-3, 55th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.
>
> Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
>
> Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.
>
> The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.
>
> And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.
>
> But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.
>
> Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.
>
> The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 KB
> • Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)
>
>
> 

>
> #5-4, 56th published book
>
> COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition
>
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
>
> #1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
>
>
> This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
> Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
> Length: 54 pages
>
>
> Product details
> File Size: 1035 KB
> Print Length: 64 pages
> Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
> Publication Date: August 18, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> #318 in Calculus (Books)
> #48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> 

> #5-5, 72nd published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.
>
> Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension.
> Length: 105 pages
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)
>
>
> #5-6, 75th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
>
> This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.
>
> Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.
>
> Length: 175 pages
>
>
> Product details
> ASIN : B0836F1YF6
> Publication date : December 26, 2019
> Language : English
> File size : 741 KB
> Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> Screen Reader : Supported
> Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> X-Ray : Not Enabled
> Word Wise : Not Enabled
> Print length : 175 pages
> Lending : Enabled
> Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)
>
>
>
> #5-7, 89th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
>
> Last revision was 6Feb2021.
> Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own.. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.
>
> Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.
>
> Length: 110 pages
>
> Product details
> ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
> Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
> Language ‏ : ‎ English
> File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB
> Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
> Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)
>
> #5-8, 90th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
>
> Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.
>
> Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.
>
> My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.
>
> So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project.. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.
>
> Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.
>
> Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry. But I have more to say on this below.
> Length: 296 pages
>
> Product details
> ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
> Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
> Language ‏ : ‎ English
> File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB
> Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
> Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #13 in General Geometry
> ◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
>
>
> #5-9, 221st published book
>
> An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
>
> Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.
>
> Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.
>
> My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
> AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
> Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages
>
>
>
>
>
> #5-10, 160th published book
>
> MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
> by Archimedes Plutonium
>
> Preface:
> A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.
>
> The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.
>
> The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.
>
> Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.
>
> I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
> • Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages
>
>
>
> y z
> | /
> | /
> |/______ x
>
> More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci..physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
>
> In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
>
> I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
>
> There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
>
> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> Archimedes Plutonium

4-Annalena Baerbock,Chris Thomasson,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider, no-raone here especially Wolfgang Mueckenheim can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor admit the truth of conics-- slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse, and these fools embrace the error ridden Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, too ignorant to understand Boole screwed up OR with AND truth tables.

92
unread,
Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
On 1/30/2023 3:53 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.
8:38 PM

Chris M. Thomasson's profile photo
Chris M. Thomasson
, …
Python
19
unread,
Is this a natural number?
Le 31/01/2023 à 03:26, Chris M. Thomasson a écrit : > On 1/30/2023 1:51 PM, Dan Christensen wrote:
8:31 PM


> > #5-1, 134th published book
> >
> > Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.
> >
> > Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)
> >
> >
> >
> > #5-2, 45th published
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)
> >
> > Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.
> >
> > Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.
> >
> > This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.
> >
> > It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.
> >
> > Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.
> >
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
> > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > #15 in General Geometry
> > #223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #5-3, 55th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.
> >
> > Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
> >
> > Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.
> >
> > The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism.. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.
> >
> > And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.
> >
> > But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.
> >
> > Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.
> >
> > The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 KB
> > • Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)
> >
> >
> > 

> >
> > #5-4, 56th published book
> >
> > COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition
> >
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> >
> > #1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> >
> >
> > This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
> > Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
> > Length: 54 pages
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > File Size: 1035 KB
> > Print Length: 64 pages
> > Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
> > Publication Date: August 18, 2019
> > Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
> > Language: English
> > ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
> > Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> > X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

> > Word Wise: Not Enabled
> > Lending: Enabled
> > Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> > Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> > #38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > #318 in Calculus (Books)
> > #48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > 

> > #5-5, 72nd published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.
> >
> > Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension..
> > Length: 105 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)
> >
> >
> > #5-6, 75th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
> >
> > This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics.. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.
> >
> > Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.
> >
> > Length: 175 pages
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN : B0836F1YF6
> > Publication date : December 26, 2019
> > Language : English
> > File size : 741 KB
> > Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > Screen Reader : Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > Word Wise : Not Enabled
> > Print length : 175 pages
> > Lending : Enabled
> > Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)
> >
> >
> >
> > #5-7, 89th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
> >
> > Last revision was 6Feb2021.
> > Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.
> >
> > Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.
> >
> > Length: 110 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
> > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)
> >
> > #5-8, 90th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
> >
> > Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.
> >
> > Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.
> >
> > My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.
> >
> > So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.
> >
> > Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.
> >
> > Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry. But I have more to say on this below.
> > Length: 296 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
> > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #13 in General Geometry
> > ◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
> >
> >
> > #5-9, 221st published book
> >
> > An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
> >
> > Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.
> >
> > Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.
> >
> > My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
> > AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
> > Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #5-10, 160th published book
> >
> > MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
> > by Archimedes Plutonium
> >
> > Preface:
> > A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.
> >
> > The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.
> >
> > The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.
> >
> > Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.
> >
> > I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
> > • Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages
> >
> >
> >
> > y z
> > | /
> > | /
> > |/______ x
> >
> > More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
> >
> > In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
> >
> > I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
> >
> > There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
> >
> > Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> > Archimedes Plutonium

BND spam Ukraine War ends in March 2023
██۞██ Moscow electric blackouts██۞██ with Putin disposed due to Drones knocking out Russia electric lines

Wolfgang Mueckenheim is your spam headquarters in Hilbert Hotel???

unread,
Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
On 1/31/2023 10:17 AM, Eram semper recta wrote: > On Monday, 30 January 2023 at 21:59:27 UTC+2,
2:57 PM

WM's profile photo
WM
, …
Jim Burns
45
unread,
The testimony of unit fractions
On 1/31/2023 7:47 AM, WM wrote: > FromTheRafters schrieb am Montag, > 30. Januar 2023 um 19:08:
2:50 PM, Jan 31, 2023


On Friday, June 17, 2022 at 2:07:10 PM UTC-5, olcott wrote:
> "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
> Genius hits a target no one else can see."

How the Ukraine War likely ends-- drones in Jan-Feb knock out Moscow,St.Petersburg,Volgograd,Vladivostok Electric Power lines, causing the Russian people to remove the dumb dictator Putin// Science Council Rules Earth, not petty dictators

Question Mi5 Suella Braverman and Mi6 James Cleverly. Is Russia unable to reproduce the Javelin antitank missile because it has electronics inside that Russia cannot produce. This is important for the Leopard and Abrams and UK tanks sent????

Braverman and Cleverly, why cannot the Russians build a Javelin themselves???? Is it the electronics??

No tanks are safe with javelins. Leading one to wonder why the big fuss over Leopard 2 and Abrams tanks?? Russia has the Kornet missile although not as good as the Javelin, still, tank warfare is steadily on the decline and going obsolete.

This is why the war ends when Moscow and St.Petersburg and Volgograd and Vladivostok electric lines are blackout by drones.

Drones are the key to ending this war.

NATO, Ukraine, USA, you need to supply Ukraine with drones that can knock out all electric power lines of Russia. The Russian people only learn of change once they see their electricity is cut, then they remove the dumb bully Putin.

Give Ukraine drones by the thousands immediately, for Winter is the time to teach Russia of no electricity. By Spring and Summer it is too late and we have a full year of more war.

Give Ukraine drones so this war ends by March 2023.

How the Ukraine War likely ends-- drones in Jan-Feb knock out Moscow,St.Petersburg,Volgograd,Vladivostok Electric Power lines, causing the Russian people to remove the dumb dictator Putin// Science Council Rules Earth, not petty dictators

Give the Ukraine's 10,000 drones that easily knock out electric power lines in Russia. Putin's Russia does it to Ukraine, and so, Ukraine must do it back on Russia. This is how to end Putin's savage invasion. End it by March 2023.

The tanks being sent to Ukraine is for the March and April clean up of Ukraine as the Ukrains push out all the left behind Russians, even Crimea.

And here, China should take back Haishenwai and Outer Manchuria as Putin is removed.

Russia is about 100 years behind the times in "good governance" and so they need less land to take care of, for they certainly cannot take care of the land they already have.

5-Annalena Baerbock, WM,William,Anja Karliczek,Karl-Henning Rehren,Ansgar Reiners,Metin Tolin,Susanne Schneider, no-raone here especially Wolfgang Mueckenheim can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor admit the truth of conics-- slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse, and these fools embrace the error ridden Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, too ignorant to understand Boole screwed up OR with AND truth tables.

WM

William

The testimony of unit fractions
William schrieb am Freitag, 3. Februar 2023 um 23:25:33 UTC+1: > On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 5:
2:32 AM


2
sickfuck spammers Fritz Feldhase,WM-- never a geometry proof of Fundamental theorem of Calculus, and his mindless Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, and geometry failure who cannot admit slant cut of cone is Oval, not ellipse

> 92
> unread,
> Question on Hilbert's Hotel.
> On 1/30/2023 3:53 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.
> 8:38 PM
> 
> Chris M. Thomasson's profile photo
> Chris M. Thomasson
> , …
> Python
> 19
> unread,
> Is this a natural number?
> Le 31/01/2023 à 03:26, Chris M. Thomasson a écrit : > On 1/30/2023 1:51 PM, Dan Christensen wrote:
> 8:31 PM
> 
> > > #5-1, 134th published book
> > >
> > > Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > >
> > > The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes..
> > >
> > > Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
> > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > > ◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > #5-2, 45th published
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)
> > >
> > > Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.
> > >
> > > Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.
> > >
> > > This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.
> > >
> > > It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.
> > >
> > > Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
> > > Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
> > > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
> > > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
> > > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > #15 in General Geometry
> > > #223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > #5-3, 55th published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > >
> > > Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.
> > >
> > > Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
> > >
> > > Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.
> > >
> > > The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.
> > >
> > > And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.
> > >
> > > But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.
> > >
> > > Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.
> > >
> > > The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 KB
> > > • Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
> > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > > 

> > >
> > > #5-4, 56th published book
> > >
> > > COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition
> > >
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > >
> > >
> > > #1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > >
> > >
> > > This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
> > > Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
> > > Length: 54 pages
> > >
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > File Size: 1035 KB
> > > Print Length: 64 pages
> > > Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
> > > Publication Date: August 18, 2019
> > > Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
> > > Language: English
> > > ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
> > > Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> > > X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

> > > Word Wise: Not Enabled
> > > Lending: Enabled
> > > Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> > > Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> > > #38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > > #318 in Calculus (Books)
> > > #48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > > 

> > > #5-5, 72nd published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > >
> > > Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.
> > >
> > > Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension.
> > > Length: 105 pages
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
> > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > > #5-6, 75th published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
> > >
> > > This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.
> > >
> > > Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.
> > >
> > > Length: 175 pages
> > >
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > ASIN : B0836F1YF6
> > > Publication date : December 26, 2019
> > > Language : English
> > > File size : 741 KB
> > > Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > > Screen Reader : Supported
> > > Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > > X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > > Word Wise : Not Enabled
> > > Print length : 175 pages
> > > Lending : Enabled
> > > Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > #5-7, 89th published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
> > >
> > > Last revision was 6Feb2021.
> > > Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.
> > >
> > > Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.
> > >
> > > Length: 110 pages
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
> > > Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
> > > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB
> > > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
> > > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)
> > >
> > > #5-8, 90th published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
> > >
> > > Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.
> > >
> > > Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.
> > >
> > > My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.
> > >
> > > So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.
> > >
> > > Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.
> > >
> > > Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry.. But I have more to say on this below.
> > > Length: 296 pages
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
> > > Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
> > > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB
> > > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
> > > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #13 in General Geometry
> > > ◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > > #5-9, 221st published book
> > >
> > > An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
> > >
> > > Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.
> > >
> > > Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.
> > >
> > > My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
> > > AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > >
> > > My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
> > > Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > #5-10, 160th published book
> > >
> > > MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium
> > >
> > > Preface:
> > > A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.
> > >
> > > The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.
> > >
> > > The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.
> > >
> > > Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book..
> > >
> > > I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
> > > • Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > y z
> > > | /
> > > | /
> > > |/______ x
> > >
> > > More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
> > >
> > > In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
> > >
> > > I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
> > >
> > > There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
> > >
> > > Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> > > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> > > Archimedes Plutonium