Kibo, was Dr. Hanlon demoted from teaching math at Dartmouth for the fool just cannot understand geometry, the slant cut is never a ellipse. And that also cascades into Dr. Hanlon never able to even recognize Calculus with a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Dartmouth is kind hearted and gave him job as president of Dartmouth, for they did not want to see him out on the streets as a hobo.

Kibo Parry M on Dartmouth's Dr.Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne,Ruth Charney & Andrew Wiles too stupid to see the cylinder gives a ellipse but cone gives a oval, never ellipse. Are they more stupid than you Kibo with your 938 is 12% short of 945 in math?

On Sunday, July 24, 2022 at 12:05:54 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"mindless fuckdog"
>"Court Jester of Math"

Kibo why is Dartmouth's Dr.Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne,Ruth Charney & Andrew Wiles too stupid to see the cylinder gives a ellipse but cone gives a oval, never ellipse. Are they more stupid than you Zelos in math?

--- quoting from AP's 68th book of science ---
ARRAY, Analytic Geometry Proof, Cylinder Section is a Ellipse::


E
__
.-' `-.
.' `.
/ \
; ;
| G c | H
; ;
\ /
`. .'
`-. _____ .-'
F

Alright, focus on the distance from c to F in the cone-cut compared to the distance from c to E

In a Cylinder cut, those two distances are the same because a cylinder has two axes of symmetry.

The side view of a cylinder is this

| |
| |
| |

That allows cE to be the same distance as cF

But the side view of the cone is

/\E
/c \
F / \

The distance c to E is shorter because the slant of the side walls of the cone are in the direction of shortening cE, whereas the slant opposite c in cF makes that distance larger than cE.

🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics Archimedes "Court Jester of Math" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
> Kibo, was Dr. Hanlon demoted from teaching math at Dartmouth for the fool just cannot understand geometry, the slant cut is never a ellipse.

You were demoted from Dartmouth potwasher because you could not
understand geometry, the geometry which proves the cone slant cut is an
ellipse? Were you fired because there was no position to demote you to?
While only really dumb and stoopid people can't understand that, I don't
see that as a reason to fire a stoopid potwasher. I thought you were
fired because you were simply too dumb and stoopid to stop posting your
garbage under a dartmouth.edu address like they repeatedly told you. Or
that you were so dumb and stoopid, you threatened the Dartmouth
administrators.

> And that also cascades into Dr. Hanlon never able to even recognize Calculus with a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Dartmouth is kind hearted and gave him job as president of Dartmouth, for they did not want to see him out on the streets as a hobo.

Dr. Hanlon was promoted to president since he was smart enough to know
the cone slant cut is an ellipse? That doesn't make sense since every
mathematician knows the cone slant cut is an ellipse. Even the ancient
Greeks knew that!
>
> Kibo Parry M on Dartmouth's Dr.Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne,Ruth Charney & Andrew Wiles too stupid to see the cylinder gives a ellipse but cone gives a oval, never ellipse. Are they more stupid than you Kibo with your 938 is 12% short of 945 in math?

You are still too dumb and stoopid to understand that 938 MeV is 12% of
a muon mass short of 951 MeV (mass of 9 muons)? That doesn't surprise
me, you sure are creative at being dumb and stoopid!
>
> On Sunday, July 24, 2022 at 12:05:54 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Archimedes "mindless fuckdog" Plutonium flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
>> Archimedes "Court Jester of Math" Plutonium
>
>
> Kibo why is Dartmouth's Dr.Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne,Ruth Charney & Andrew Wiles too stupid to see the cylinder gives a ellipse but cone gives a oval, never ellipse. Are they more stupid than you Zelos in math?

Zelos understands why the ellipse is a conic section just fine. He
certainly isn't about to believe "Because I say so!" as a math proof!

Michael Moroney wrote:

> 🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics Archimedes "Court Jester of Math" Plutonium
> <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
>> Kibo, was Dr. Hanlon demoted from teaching math at Dartmouth for the
>> fool just cannot understand geometry, the slant cut is never a ellipse.
>
> You were demoted from Dartmouth potwasher because you could not
> understand geometry, the geometry which proves the cone slant cut is an
> ellipse? Were you fired because there was no position to demote you to?

Kibo, see you in Vogue.

Strike destroys over 100 US-made HIMARS rockets
https://www.rt.com/news/559711-strike-destroys-himars-ammunition/

The Defense Ministry says an ammunition depot was targeted in attacks that
also killed Ukrainian forces and foreign mercenaries

“On July 24, a strike by Russia’s Aerospace Forces on an ammunition depot
near the settlement of Lyubimovka, Dnepropetrovsk region, destroyed more
than a hundred missiles for the US-made HIMARS Multiple launch rocket
system,” the ministry’s report reads. It is also noted that up to 120
Ukrainian military personnel guarding the facility, as well as foreign
mercenaries and technical specialists, were killed.

Kibo says mindless fuckdog NSF Panchanathan, William J. Burns, Terence Tao, Andrew Wiles, Dartmouth's Dr. Hanlon

On Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 10:24:50 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"Court Jester of Math"
>"mindless fuckdog"

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 11:29:08 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>of Math andof Physics"goonclod failure of logic"
>"mindless fuckdog"

Kibo Parry Moron blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> >
> >http://www.netscum.net/fieldsm0.html
> What the hell is this? As if it's not bad enough that we have a fake
> Mao Zhedong here, now we have a fake kibo too?
> Is there a fake xibo and a ~ibo to round out the trinity?
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Kibo, no math, no science with his 938 is 12% short of 945. Yet Usenet allows this 30 year nonstop stalker to stalk,stalk stalk

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
 > Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
 > Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>  Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572.  A proton is about the mass
 > of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Kibo Parry Moroney stalker of 28 years of scientists, or, paid for stalker? The 28 year long stalking of AP by kibo Parry Moroney makes one think that the NSF, National Science Foundation is paying for kibo Parry to stalk, paying him and World std perhaps $100 of taxpayer dollars for every stalking post that Kibo emits. So yes, if you are paid such easy money just to post ad hominem spam, then you too would probably want some of that almost free money.

---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Dr. Panchanathan , present day
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh
Arden Lee Bement Jr.
Rita R. Colwell
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993

Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua

Kibo failed algebra and numbers and worse yet never studied geometry with his nonsense b.s. on slant cut of cone as ellipse when in reality it is a Oval.

> Oh you need to see the ellipse-is-a-conic-section proof again? Here you go!
>
>
> Some preliminaries:
>
> Top view of the conic section and depiction of the coordinate system used
> in the proof:
>
> ^ x
> |
> -+- <= x=h
> .' | `.
> . | .
> | | |
> ' | '
> `. | .'
> y <----------+ <= x=0
>
> Cone (side view):
> .
> /|\
> / | \
> /b | \
> /---+---' <= x = h
> / |' \
> / ' | \
> / ' | \
> x = 0 => '-------+-------\
> / a | \
>
> Proof:
>
> r(x) = a - ((a-b)/h)x and d(x) = a - ((a+b)/h)x, hence
>
> y(x)^2 = r(x)^2 - d(x)^2 = ab - ab(2x/h - 1)^2 = ab(1 - 4(x - h/2)^2/h^2.
>
> Hence (1/ab)y(x)^2 + (4/h^2)(x - h/2)^2 = 1 ...equation of an ellipse
>
> qed
>

After 30 years, Usenet has limited the Kibo stalker to 1 attack on AP per day--- still, 1 too many for Kibo Parry Moron needs a shrink clinic with straightjacket, not Usenet access.

More of CIA's Kibo Parry M. block spam YYYYYYYYY

---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Dr. Panchanathan , present day
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh
Arden Lee Bement Jr.
Rita R. Colwell
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993

Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua

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:
> >

124
Is WM allowed to teach math
stir-crazy--Sergio,Gottingen,Eberhard Bodenschatz, Laura Covi,Metin Tolin why does Wolfgang
12:58 PM

WM's profile photo
WM
, …
FromTheRafters
570
unread,
Natural numbers and vases III
FromTheRafters schrieb am Montag, 15. August 2022 um 10:55:30 UTC+2: > After serious thinking WM
12:58 PM


12:54 PM

sergi o's profile photo
sergi o
,
Sergio
7 Natural numbers ant vases V
On 8/11/2022 11:14 AM, Sergio wrote: > On 8/9/2022 6:11 PM, Sergio wrote: >> On 8/9/2022 8:
12:39 PM

WM's profile photo
WM
, …
Sergio
92
unread,
Natural numbers and vases IV
On 8/15/2022 9:01 AM, Timothy Golden wrote: > On Wednesday, August 10, 2022 at 11:26:00 AM UTC-4,
12:37 PM

pva...@yahoo.com's profile photo
pva...@yahoo.com
2 unread,
Einstein's Relativity and the End of Civilization
Nowadays the death of physics is so obvious that it has even entered popular culture: Leonard: "
12:22 PM

pva...@yahoo.com's profile photo
pva...@yahoo.com
2 unread,
Einstein's Relativity and Flat-Earth Myths
Einsteinians inform the brainwashed world that the constancy of the speed of light is the result of a
12:05 PM

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y's profile photo
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
unread,
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
11:01 AM

,
Pancho Valvejob
3 unread,
unununs

Kibo says mindless fuckdog NSF Panchanathan, William J. Burns, Terence Tao, Andrew Wiles, Dartmouth's Dr. Hanlon
>
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 10:24:50 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"Court Jester of Math"
> >"mindless fuckdog"
>
> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 11:29:08 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >of Math andof Physics"goonclod failure of logic"
> >"mindless fuckdog"
>
> Kibo Parry Moron blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997
> Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > >
> > >http://www.netscum.net/fieldsm0.html
> > What the hell is this? As if it's not bad enough that we have a fake
> > Mao Zhedong here, now we have a fake kibo too?
> > Is there a fake xibo and a ~ibo to round out the trinity?
> > --scott
> > --
> > "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
> Kibo, no math, no science with his 938 is 12% short of 945. Yet Usenet allows this 30 year nonstop stalker to stalk,stalk stalk
> On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> > Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
> Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> > of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
> Kibo Parry Moroney stalker of 28 years of scientists, or, paid for stalker? The 28 year long stalking of AP by kibo Parry Moroney makes one think that the NSF, National Science Foundation is paying for kibo Parry to stalk, paying him and World std perhaps $100 of taxpayer dollars for every stalking post that Kibo emits. So yes, if you are paid such easy money just to post ad hominem spam, then you too would probably want some of that almost free money.
>
> ---quoting Wikipedia ---
> Controversy
> Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
> --- end quote ---
>
> NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
>
> Dr. Panchanathan , present day
> France Anne Cordova
> Subra Suresh
> Arden Lee Bement Jr.
> Rita R. Colwell
> Neal Francis Lane
> John Howard Gibbons 1993
>
> Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
> Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua
>
>
> Kibo failed algebra and numbers and worse yet never studied geometry with his nonsense b.s. on slant cut of cone as ellipse when in reality it is a Oval.
>
>
> > Oh you need to see the ellipse-is-a-conic-section proof again? Here you go!
> >
> >
> > Some preliminaries:
> >
> > Top view of the conic section and depiction of the coordinate system used
> > in the proof:
> >
> > ^ x
> > |
> > -+- <= x=h
> > .' | `.
> > . | .
> > | | |
> > ' | '
> > `. | .'
> > y <----------+ <= x=0
> >
> > Cone (side view):
> > .
> > /|\
> > / | \
> > /b | \
> > /---+---' <= x = h
> > / |' \
> > / ' | \
> > / ' | \
> > x = 0 => '-------+-------\
> > / a | \
> >
> > Proof:
> >
> > r(x) = a - ((a-b)/h)x and d(x) = a - ((a+b)/h)x, hence
> >
> > y(x)^2 = r(x)^2 - d(x)^2 = ab - ab(2x/h - 1)^2 = ab(1 - 4(x - h/2)^2/h^2.
> >
> > Hence (1/ab)y(x)^2 + (4/h^2)(x - h/2)^2 = 1 ...equation of an ellipse
> >
> > qed
> >
>
> After 30 years, Usenet has limited the Kibo stalker to 1 attack on AP per day--- still, 1 too many for Kibo Parry Moron needs a shrink clinic with straightjacket, not Usenet access.

Kibo says Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne,NSF Dr.Panchanathan, agree 938 is 12% short of 945.
On Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 10:24:50 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"mindless fuckdog"
> "Court Jester of Math"
> fails at math and science:

Why cannot Kibo Parry M. NSF and AMS admit they are wrong 938 is not 12% short of 945.

How much does NSF Dr. Panchanathan pay Kibo Parry M. to stalk AP and liar about math and science? I hope it is 0 dollars.

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

Why cannot Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Ken Ribet, Andrew Beal, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Gerald Edgar, AMS.. Kibo, admit that a slant cut in cone is Oval never ellipse?? Are they math stupid and illiterates of math and never admit to their mistakes?

Is it because no-one there can do a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, all they can offer is a limit analysis, so shoddy in logic they never realized that "analyzing" is not the same as "proving" for analyzing is much in the same as "measuring but not proving". And yet, none can do a geometry proof and the reason is quite clear for none can even see that the slant cut in single right-circular cone is a Oval, never the ellipse. So they could never do a geometry proof of FTC even if they wanted to. For they have no logical geometry brain to begin to do anything geometrical. Is it that Andrew Wiles and Terence Tao cannot understand the slant cut in single cone is an Oval, never the ellipse, or is it the foolish Boole logic they teach of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction? Not having a Logical brain to do math, for any rational person would be upset by Wiles, Tao saying truth table of AND is TFFF when it actually is TTTF. Is that why neither Terence Tao or Andrew Wiles can do a geometry proof Fundamental Theorem of Calculus?

Maybe they need to take up Earle Jones offer to wash dishes or pots at Stanford Univ or where ever, for they sure cannot do mathematics.
Why are these people failures of Math?? For none can even contemplate these 4 questions.

1) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
2) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
3) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
4) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

Mason Yearian & Alexander Fetter> 🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics "Court Jester of Math"
Kibo's selfie-pictures of Stanford Univ teachers (so called teachers of fake physics)
On Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 10:24:50 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
Mason Yearian & Alexander Fetter> 🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics "Court Jester of Math"
>"mindless fuckdog"

Kibo on Stanford Univ> 👎🏼 of Math and 🖕🏼 of Physics
On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 1:20:09 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
William Little, Douglas Osheroff,> 👎🏼 of Math and 🖕🏼 of Physics Univ Stanford Marc & Persis "science hater"
> fails at math and science:
>"mindless fuckdog"

Why Kibo ParryM. is it because MIT is far too stupid in physics to ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.

> > 1) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
> > 2) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
> > 3) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
> > 4) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

President: Marc Tessier-Lavigne (neuroscience)
Provost: Persis Drell (physics)

Stanford physics dept.

Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Stanley Wojcicki, Mason Yearian

We sent two men to land on the Moon in 1969, but by 2022 Harvard Univ cannot stop teaching falsehoods (1) AND truth table is TTTF not TFFF, (2) a slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse (3) a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, not a limit b.s. hornswaggle of 0 width rectangles of interior area (4) simply asking the question is the true electron of atoms the muon or the 0.5MeV particle, for the muon is stuck inside a 840MeV Proton torus doing the Faraday Law. Harvard Univ not only fails Science, but hates the truth and reality of science and the world of science.

By 2022 Dartmouth College cannot help itself, cannot stop teaching falsehoods. We sent two men to land on the Moon in 1969, but McGill Univ by 2022 still teaches b.s. falsehoods (1) AND truth table is TTTF not TFFF, (2) a slant cut in cone is Oval, never ellipse (3) a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, not a limit b.s. hornswaggle of 0 width rectangles of interior area (4) simply asking the question is the true electron of atoms the muon or the 0.5MeV particle, for the muon is stuck inside a 840MeV Proton torus doing the Faraday Law. Dartmouth College not only fails Science, but hates the truth and reality of science and the world of science.

Even the parents of Dartmouth students can recognize something wrong in a Dartmouth education of Logic AND as 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, because a truth table of TFFF as taught at Dartmouth, switches the OR for the AND.

So it is funny how humanity can send a man to the Moon when Kennedy asks of such by 1969. But that Dartmouth College cannot correct something as simple as AND truth table is actually TTTF yet Dartmouth crams down the throat its students with the hypocrisy of TFFF for AND.

Take this bullshit failed ignorance to sci.logic, you do not deserve to post in sci.math.
On Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 10:24:50 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:

Take this bullshit over to sci.logic, for you are a math failure-- Your AND connector is subtraction with 2 OR 1 = 3. You do not even know a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. You are a failure in geometry for your slant cut in cone is a ellipse when actually that is a oval. But worst of all-- you are so stupid in science you cannot even ask the question which is the atom's true electron-- 0.5MeV particle or the muon stuck inside a 840 MeV proton torus.

You do not deserve to post in sci.math with your failed ignorance of math.

3rd published book

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 11, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 20 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
•
•

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)

Last revision was 14May2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.

Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.

In the course of 2019 through 2022, I have had to explain this proof often on Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics. And one thing that constant explaining does for a mind of science, is reduce the proof to its stripped down minimum format, to bare bones skeleton proof. I can prove the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse in just a one sentence proof. Proof-- A single cone and oval have just one axis of symmetry, while a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, hence slant cut is always a oval, never the ellipse..

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 21, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 827 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 ‏ : ‎ 51 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

#12-2, 11th published book

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 15Dec2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
Preface:
Actually my title is too modest, for the proof that lies within this book makes it the World's First Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for in my modesty, I just wanted to emphasis that calculus was geometry and needed a geometry proof. Not being modest, there has never been a valid proof of FTC until AP's 2015 proof. This also implies that only a geometry proof of FTC constitutes a valid proof of FTC.

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had a huge mass of mistakes, errors, fakes and con-artist trickery such as the "limit analysis". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.

To give a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus requires math be cleaned-up and cleaned-out of most of math's mistakes and errors. So in a sense, a Geometry FTC proof is a exercise in Consistency of all of Mathematics. In order to prove a FTC geometry proof, requires throwing out the error filled mess of Old Math. Can the Reals be the true numbers of mathematics if the Reals cannot deliver a Geometry proof of FTC? Can the functions that are not polynomial functions allow us to give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a Coordinate System in 2D have 4 quadrants and still give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a equation of mathematics with a number that is _not a positive decimal Grid Number_ all alone on the right side of the equation, at all times, allow us to give a Geometry proof of the FTC?

Cover Picture: Is my hand written, one page geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the world's first geometry proof of FTC, 2013-2015, by AP.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQTNHMY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 14, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 154 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#134 in Calculus (Books)
#20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)