Earle, you failed Ohm's law at Stanford Univ yet passed turning out the lights. While Harvard Univ Dr. Hau passed Ohm's law but failed turning out the lights.

Earle do you think we can locate the loose marbles in your head by using Dr. Hau as a spatial reference point??

Earle, you failed Ohm's law at Stanford Univ, never able to understand Ohm's law is really V=i*B*E, not V = i*R yet passed turning out the lights. While Harvard Univ Dr. Hau passed Ohm's law but failed turning out the lights.

Earle do you think we can locate the loose marbles in your head by using Dr. Hau as a spatial reference point??

Neither Harvard nor Stanford can admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse, is that why Dr.Hau cannot turn the lights off in slow light experiment-- she fails geometry???

7-David Brooks🤡Michael Roston🤡 "Court Jester of Math"

> On Friday, August 6, 2021 at 12:40:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney (Kibo Parry M) wrote:
> > fails at math and science:
> Well, Kibo, fire them all and be done with it, if they cannot admit the truth of science-- slant cut of cone is oval, never ellipse.

Mr. Brooks and Mr. Roston, what is the point in even having a The New York Times Science Section, when it cannot even answer the question of a New Yorker as Mr. Marshall Lett who wants to know if slant cut of cone is ellipse or oval.

Just because the NYT hates the guts of AP, and wants to never print his name, is no excuse in answering Mr. Lett's question. Besides, if NYT never answers the question, shows only that likely all of the NYT stories are just propaganda bias. You cannot answer science, means the rest of your newspaper is unreliable.

> > Kibo Parry M, why you hate the NYT with David Brooks and Michael Roston, is it because everyone there cannot ask the simple question of AP-- which is the Atom's true electron-- Muon or 0.5MeV particle, is that why you hate the NYT newspaper--so so dumb in science.
> >
> > The AP mantra of current science where most people fail:
> > > > 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.
> > David Brooks, Michael Roston is it not childish to have a curse on AP, to never print his name in your newspaper, when the mature grown up act is to publish the fact in your Science section-- slant cut of cone is Oval, and is never ellipse. So that all the residents of New York state realize the truth, and intelligent people like Mr. Marshall Lett need not ask the question. People in New York state and around the world asking which is the slant cut in cone-- is it ellipse or oval??? Yet the Science section of The New York Times refusing to publish the truth because it means printing the name Archimedes Plutonium for which NYT vows to never do. For to publish the truth on conics means having to print the name Archimedes Plutonium as discoverer of the truth. And nothing worse in all the world for Mr. Sulzberger is to have to print the name Archimedes Plutonium in his newspaper. Hatred rules the The New York Times, not the truth of the world.
> > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > >
> > > > Who am I supposed to believe?
> > > Look, the NYT cannot even cover the truth of math or science, and thus, cannot tell the truth of social life in America of politics, of history. If you cannot tell the truth of a Oval versus Ellipse, anything else you say is likely to be the truth.
> > >
> > > The New York Times cannot cover the truth of math or science-- Slant cut of Cone is Oval, never ellipse. Means the The New York Times is a garbage newsprint that cannot cover the truth of history, politics or the daily news.
> > >
> > > The New York Times, certainly cannot tell the truth about math or science, certainly then, cannot tell the truth about history or politics. As soon as David Brooks opens his mouth on politics, is as soon as- turn the TV off. For The New York Times is not about the "truth of the world" but about their own childish games. A sort of Fascism of News.
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > David Brooks, is the NYT as dumb and stupid in politics as it is dumb and stupid in math-science-- NYT cannot tell the difference between oval and ellipse. Does Michael Roston even know what a oval is??? Is any of the Science printed in the New York Times, is any of your science truthful or is it all a bunch of garbage prattle like your ellipse is a conic section when that is false. Are there any logical brains at the NYT, or is the NYT empty of logical brains???
> > >
> > >
> > > > Mr. Sulzberger, you have a Science section in your newspaper, you have residents of New York State such as Mr. Lett. What the hell good is your Science section, Mr. Sulzberger if you cannot even answer the question-- Slant cut of Cone is Oval, never the ellipse. All because you hate the guts of AP, that your Science section refuses to tell the truth.
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Marshall Lett started a thread over in sci.math, asking the question of what the slant cut in cone truly is?
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who am I supposed to believe?
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Kahn, is it not awfully childish of the The New York Times to hold a curse on AP, and you ignore the science truth and reality. Your motto at the Times-- "all the news fit to print" maybe should become "all the news except Archimedes Plutonium for the NYT hates his guts".
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Joseph Kahn, why even bother having a Science section at The New York Times, when your newspaper cannot even inform and teach readers the truth of science-- slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse. Even your New York residents are asking question. Even your New York High School students have more geometry brains than the staff at the The New York Times.
> > > >
> > > > > > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > > > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Who am I supposed to believe?

996--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
•
•

997-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..

Neither Harvard nor Stanford can admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse, is that why Dr.Hau cannot turn the lights off in slow light experiment-- she fails geometry seeing a ellipse when in reality it is a oval??? Is that why Earle Jones fails Ohm's law for it really is where Resistance is two components of B*E, magnetic field times electric field (generalized multiplication), and when a clown cannot see that oval and cone have 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse and cylinder have 2 axes of symmetry-- of course they fail in many other science issues.

7-David Brooks🤡Michael Roston🤡 "Court Jester of Math"

> On Friday, August 6, 2021 at 12:40:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney (Kibo Parry M) wrote:
> > fails at math and science:
> Well, Kibo, fire them all and be done with it, if they cannot admit the truth of science-- slant cut of cone is oval, never ellipse.

Mr. Brooks and Mr. Roston, what is the point in even having a The New York Times Science Section, when it cannot even answer the question of a New Yorker as Mr. Marshall Lett who wants to know if slant cut of cone is ellipse or oval.

Just because the NYT hates the guts of AP, and wants to never print his name, is no excuse in answering Mr. Lett's question. Besides, if NYT never answers the question, shows only that likely all of the NYT stories are just propaganda bias. You cannot answer science, means the rest of your newspaper is unreliable.

> > Kibo Parry M, why you hate the NYT with David Brooks and Michael Roston, is it because everyone there cannot ask the simple question of AP-- which is the Atom's true electron-- Muon or 0.5MeV particle, is that why you hate the NYT newspaper--so so dumb in science.
> >
> > The AP mantra of current science where most people fail:
> > > > 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.
> > David Brooks, Michael Roston is it not childish to have a curse on AP, to never print his name in your newspaper, when the mature grown up act is to publish the fact in your Science section-- slant cut of cone is Oval, and is never ellipse. So that all the residents of New York state realize the truth, and intelligent people like Mr. Marshall Lett need not ask the question. People in New York state and around the world asking which is the slant cut in cone-- is it ellipse or oval??? Yet the Science section of The New York Times refusing to publish the truth because it means printing the name Archimedes Plutonium for which NYT vows to never do. For to publish the truth on conics means having to print the name Archimedes Plutonium as discoverer of the truth. And nothing worse in all the world for Mr. Sulzberger is to have to print the name Archimedes Plutonium in his newspaper. Hatred rules the The New York Times, not the truth of the world.
> > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > >
> > > > Who am I supposed to believe?
> > > Look, the NYT cannot even cover the truth of math or science, and thus, cannot tell the truth of social life in America of politics, of history. If you cannot tell the truth of a Oval versus Ellipse, anything else you say is likely to be the truth.
> > >
> > > The New York Times cannot cover the truth of math or science-- Slant cut of Cone is Oval, never ellipse. Means the The New York Times is a garbage newsprint that cannot cover the truth of history, politics or the daily news.
> > >
> > > The New York Times, certainly cannot tell the truth about math or science, certainly then, cannot tell the truth about history or politics. As soon as David Brooks opens his mouth on politics, is as soon as- turn the TV off. For The New York Times is not about the "truth of the world" but about their own childish games. A sort of Fascism of News.
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > David Brooks, is the NYT as dumb and stupid in politics as it is dumb and stupid in math-science-- NYT cannot tell the difference between oval and ellipse. Does Michael Roston even know what a oval is??? Is any of the Science printed in the New York Times, is any of your science truthful or is it all a bunch of garbage prattle like your ellipse is a conic section when that is false. Are there any logical brains at the NYT, or is the NYT empty of logical brains???
> > >
> > >
> > > > Mr. Sulzberger, you have a Science section in your newspaper, you have residents of New York State such as Mr. Lett. What the hell good is your Science section, Mr. Sulzberger if you cannot even answer the question-- Slant cut of Cone is Oval, never the ellipse. All because you hate the guts of AP, that your Science section refuses to tell the truth.
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Marshall Lett started a thread over in sci.math, asking the question of what the slant cut in cone truly is?
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who am I supposed to believe?
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Kahn, is it not awfully childish of the The New York Times to hold a curse on AP, and you ignore the science truth and reality. Your motto at the Times-- "all the news fit to print" maybe should become "all the news except Archimedes Plutonium for the NYT hates his guts".
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Joseph Kahn, why even bother having a Science section at The New York Times, when your newspaper cannot even inform and teach readers the truth of science-- slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse. Even your New York residents are asking question. Even your New York High School students have more geometry brains than the staff at the The New York Times.
> > > >
> > > > > > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > > > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Who am I supposed to believe?

996--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
•
•

997-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.

On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 11:40:09 PM UTC-8, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Neither Harvard nor Stanford can admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse

If you had CAREFULLY checked my previous example then you could have found a small error
and you could have screeched with glee that you found that I made a mistake.
But you didn't.

So here is a different corrected example of the intersection of a cone and sloping plane

Cone 5(x^2+y^2)=z^2
Plane z=2x+5
Find the two points in the intersection where y=0 which are x = 5(2-sqrt(5)) and x = 5(2+sqrt(5))
Those two points are x = -1.180339887498949 and x = 21.18033988749895

And now show a table of x,y,z coordinates that are exactly on that intersection.
I step exactly the same amount for each successive x value.
And thus it steps by by exactly twice that amount for each successive z value.
Note that y is EXACTLY zero at both ends of this intersection.

Note that the widest y value is shown EXACTLY half way down that table
and thus EXACTLY half way between the two x endpoints.
That would NEVER happen if the intersection was an oval.
Note that location is not the z axis where x=0,y=0

Note that the top and bottom halves of this table are mirror images.
That would NEVER happen if the intersection was an oval.

Note than -y and +y are both on that, but to save space I don't show the -y values.

x = -1.180339887498949 y = 0. z = 2.639320225002102
x = -0.06230589874905412 y = 2.179449471770337 z = 4.875388202501892
x = 1.0557280900008408 y = 3. z = 7.111456180001682
x = 2.1737620787507357 y = 3.570714214271425 z = 9.347524157501471
x = 3.2917960675006306 y = 4. z = 11.583592135001261
x = 4.4098300562505255 y = 4.330127018922193 z = 13.819660112501051
x = 5.52786404500042 y = 4.58257569495584 z = 16.05572809000084
x = 6.645898033750314 y = 4.769696007084728 z = 18.29179606750063
x = 7.76393202250021 y = 4.898979485566356 z = 20.52786404500042
x = 8.881966011250105 y = 4.9749371855331 z = 22.76393202250021
x = 10. y = 5. z = 25.
x = 11.118033988749897 y = 4.9749371855331 z = 27.23606797749979
x = 12.23606797749979 y = 4.898979485566356 z = 29.47213595499958
x = 13.354101966249685 y = 4.769696007084728 z = 31.70820393249937
x = 14.472135954999578 y = 4.58257569495584 z = 33.94427190999916
x = 15.590169943749476 y = 4.330127018922193 z = 36.180339887498945
x = 16.70820393249937 y = 4 z = 38.41640786499874
x = 17.826237921249263 y = 3.570714214271425 z = 40.65247584249853
x = 18.94427190999916 y = 3 z = 42.88854381999832
x = 20.062305898749052 y = 2.179449471770337 z = 45.124611797498105
x = 21.18033988749895 y = 0. z = 47.3606797749979

Archie, and anyone else, should obviously not trust this and should plug each
row of those into the equation for the cone and for the plane and confirm
for themselves that both sides of each equation are equal.

This exact same process can be repeated for any other cone and plane that
have an intersection that isn't a point, like, circle, parabola or hyperbola.

Write down your own equations for your cone and sloping plane and check it yourself.

Archie:
If you had CAREFULLY checked your astonishing claim a hundred different ways
before you told anyone about this then there is a microscopic chance that you
might have found your own error before screeching it to the world, but you didn't.

When you you going to announce that you have verified all this and that you
have mailed your 500 letters of apology to everyone you have insulted about this?

Harvard'sDr.Hau🤡Michael Roston NYT🤡 "Court Jester of Math"
Neither Harvard nor Stanford can admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse, is that why Dr.Hau cannot turn the lights off in slow light experiment-- she fails geometry seeing a ellipse when in reality it is a oval??? Is that why Earle Jones fails Ohm's law for it really is where Resistance is two components of B*E, magnetic field times electric field (generalized multiplication), and when a clown cannot see that oval and cone have 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse and cylinder have 2 axes of symmetry-- of course they fail in many other science issues.

7-David Brooks🤡Michael Roston🤡 "Court Jester of Math"

> On Friday, August 6, 2021 at 12:40:30 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney (Kibo Parry M) wrote:
> > fails at math and science:
> Well, Kibo, fire them all and be done with it, if they cannot admit the truth of science-- slant cut of cone is oval, never ellipse.

Mr. Brooks and Mr. Roston, what is the point in even having a The New York Times Science Section, when it cannot even answer the question of a New Yorker as Mr. Marshall Lett who wants to know if slant cut of cone is ellipse or oval.

Just because the NYT hates the guts of AP, and wants to never print his name, is no excuse in answering Mr. Lett's question. Besides, if NYT never answers the question, shows only that likely all of the NYT stories are just propaganda bias. You cannot answer science, means the rest of your newspaper is unreliable.

> > Kibo Parry M, why you hate the NYT with David Brooks and Michael Roston, is it because everyone there cannot ask the simple question of AP-- which is the Atom's true electron-- Muon or 0.5MeV particle, is that why you hate the NYT newspaper--so so dumb in science.
> >
> > The AP mantra of current science where most people fail:
> > > > 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.
> > David Brooks, Michael Roston is it not childish to have a curse on AP, to never print his name in your newspaper, when the mature grown up act is to publish the fact in your Science section-- slant cut of cone is Oval, and is never ellipse. So that all the residents of New York state realize the truth, and intelligent people like Mr. Marshall Lett need not ask the question. People in New York state and around the world asking which is the slant cut in cone-- is it ellipse or oval??? Yet the Science section of The New York Times refusing to publish the truth because it means printing the name Archimedes Plutonium for which NYT vows to never do. For to publish the truth on conics means having to print the name Archimedes Plutonium as discoverer of the truth. And nothing worse in all the world for Mr. Sulzberger is to have to print the name Archimedes Plutonium in his newspaper. Hatred rules the The New York Times, not the truth of the world.
> > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > >
> > > > Who am I supposed to believe?
> > > Look, the NYT cannot even cover the truth of math or science, and thus, cannot tell the truth of social life in America of politics, of history. If you cannot tell the truth of a Oval versus Ellipse, anything else you say is likely to be the truth.
> > >
> > > The New York Times cannot cover the truth of math or science-- Slant cut of Cone is Oval, never ellipse. Means the The New York Times is a garbage newsprint that cannot cover the truth of history, politics or the daily news.
> > >
> > > The New York Times, certainly cannot tell the truth about math or science, certainly then, cannot tell the truth about history or politics. As soon as David Brooks opens his mouth on politics, is as soon as- turn the TV off. For The New York Times is not about the "truth of the world" but about their own childish games. A sort of Fascism of News.
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > David Brooks, is the NYT as dumb and stupid in politics as it is dumb and stupid in math-science-- NYT cannot tell the difference between oval and ellipse. Does Michael Roston even know what a oval is??? Is any of the Science printed in the New York Times, is any of your science truthful or is it all a bunch of garbage prattle like your ellipse is a conic section when that is false. Are there any logical brains at the NYT, or is the NYT empty of logical brains???
> > >
> > >
> > > > Mr. Sulzberger, you have a Science section in your newspaper, you have residents of New York State such as Mr. Lett. What the hell good is your Science section, Mr. Sulzberger if you cannot even answer the question-- Slant cut of Cone is Oval, never the ellipse. All because you hate the guts of AP, that your Science section refuses to tell the truth.
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Marshall Lett started a thread over in sci.math, asking the question of what the slant cut in cone truly is?
> > > > > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who am I supposed to believe?
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Kahn, is it not awfully childish of the The New York Times to hold a curse on AP, and you ignore the science truth and reality. Your motto at the Times-- "all the news fit to print" maybe should become "all the news except Archimedes Plutonium for the NYT hates his guts".
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Joseph Kahn, why even bother having a Science section at The New York Times, when your newspaper cannot even inform and teach readers the truth of science-- slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse. Even your New York residents are asking question. Even your New York High School students have more geometry brains than the staff at the The New York Times.
> > > >
> > > > > > > On Thursday, September 29, 2022 at 7:21:51 AM UTC-5, Marshall Lett wrote:
> > > > > > > > I'm confused. On the one hand, my teachers at school always told me it was. On the other hand, the King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium, says it is not.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Who am I supposed to believe?

996--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
•
•

997-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.

Earle describing Berkeley & Stanford as fart tunnels of physics, not as academic strongholds.

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 8:43:49 PM UTC-6, Earle Jones wrote:
> *
> is like farting into a wind tunnel. I would not expect much in return.
>
> earle
> *

Why Earle, because they are too stupid in math with their slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse, or because they fail Logic with their mindless 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, is it their raw stupidity in never asking the question which is the Atom's true electron -- muon or 0.5MeV particle.. Which is their top duncity,,, Earle Jones the failure of Stanford???

Harry Cliff, Cole, Cooper,David John Sainsbury,Cambridge University 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

Cambridge Physics Dept

Ahnert, Alai, Alexander, Allison, Ansorge, Atature, Barker, Barnes, Bartlett, Batley, Baumberg, Bohndiek, Bowman, Brown, Buscher, Butler, Campbell Carilli, Carter, Castelnovo, Challis, Chalut, Chaudhri, Chin, Ciccarelli, Cicuta, Harry Cliff, Cole, Cooper, Cowburn, Credgington, Cross, Croze, Deschler, Donald, Duffett-Smith, Dutton, Eiser, Ellis, Euser, Field, Flynn, Ford, Friend, Gibson, Green, Greenham, Gripaios, Grosche, Guck, Gull, Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes, Irvine, Jardine, Jenkins, Jones, Josephson, Keyser, Khmeinitskii, King, Kotlyar, Lamacraft, Lasenby, Lester, Longair, Lonzarich, Maiolino, Marshall, Martin, Mitov, Morris, Mortimer, Moller, Needs, Norman, Nunnenkamp, Padman,Parker, Patel, Payne, Pepper, Phillips, Pramauro, Queloz, Rao, Richer, Riley, Ritchie, Sargent, Saunders, Saxena, Schneider, Scott, Scrivener, Sebastian, Simmons, Simons, Sirringhaus, Smith, Sutherland, Taylor, Teichmann, Terentjev, Thomson, Verrechia, Walker, Ward, Warner, Weale, Webber, Whyles, Withington.

Cambridge Math Dept

Alan Baker
Bela Bollobas
Darwin Smith
John Coates
Timothy Gowers
Peter Johnstone
Imre Leader
Gabriel Paternain

Caltech Physics Dept

Barry Barish, Felix Boehm, Steven Frautschi
Murray Gell-Mann, David Goodstein, Thomas Phillips,
John Schwarz, Barry Simon, Kip Thorne, Petr Vogel,
Rochus Vogt, Ward Whaling, Michael E. Brown,
Konstantin Batygin

UCLA chancellor: Gene D. Block (biology)

UCLA Physics dept
Ernest Abers, Elihu Abrahams, Katsushi Arisaka, Michalis Bachtis
Eric Becklin, Zvi Bern, Rubin Braunstein, Stuart Brown, Robijn Bruinsma
Charles Buchanan, Wesley Campbell, Troy Carter, Sudip Chakravarty
W. Gilbert Clark, John Cornwall, Robert Cousins, Eric D'Hoker
Robert Finkelstein, Christian Fronsdal, Walter Gekelman, Graciela Gelmini
George Gruner, Michael Gutperle, Brad Hansen, Jay Hauser, Karoly Holczer
Huan Huang, Eric Hudson, George Igo, Per Kraus, Alexander Kusenko
Thomas Mason, George Morales, Warren Mori, Steven Moszkowski
Christoph Niemann, Kumar Patel, Roberto Peccei, Claudio Pellegrini
Seth Putterman, B. Regan, James Rosenzweig, Joseph Rudnick
David Saltzberg, William Slater, Reiner Stenzel, Terry Tomboulis, Jean Turner

UCSD, Univ Calif San Diego, physics dept

Henry D.I. Abarbanel, Kam S. Arnold, Daniel P. Arovas, Richard D. Averitt, Julio T. Barreiro, Dimitri N. Basov, Steven Boggs, James G. Branson, Adam J.. Burgasser, Leonid V. Butov, Alison Coil, Eva-Maria S. Collins, Max Di Ventra, Patrick H. Diamond, Fred C. Driscoll, Daniel H. Dubin,
Olga K. Dudko, Raphael M. Flauger, Michael M. Fogler, Alex Frano, George M. Fuller, Daniel R Green, Kim Griest, Benjamin Grinstein, Alexander Groisman, Tarun Grover, Jorge E. Hirsch, Michael Holst, Terence T. Hwa, Kenneth A. Intriligator, Elizabent Jenkins, Suckjoon Jun, Brian Keating, Dusan Keres, David Kleinfeld, Quinn M. Konopacky, Elena F. Koslover, Julius Kuti, Tongyan Lin, Aneesh V. Manohar, M. Brian Maple, John A. McGreevy, Thomas W. Murphy, Kaixuan Ni, Michael L. Norman, Thomas M O'Neil, Hans P. Paar, Mark Paddock, Jeremie Palacci, Tenio Popmintchev, Wouter-Jan Rappel, Karin M. Sandstrom, Ivan K. Schuller, Lu J. Sham, Vivek Sharma, Tatyana O. Sharpee, Brian Shotwell, Oleg Shpyrko, Elizabeth H Simmons, Sunil K. Sinha, Douglas E. Smith, Harry Suhl

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Physics dept
Vincent Meunier, Ethan Brown, Glenn Ciolek, Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt, Yong Sung Kim, Gyorgy Korniss, Toh-Ming Lu, Charles Martin, Joseph Darryl Michael, Heidi Jo Newberg, Moussa N'Gom, Peter Persans, John Schroeder, Michael Shur, Shawn-Yu Lin, Humberto Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang, Morris A Washington, Esther A. Wertz, Christian M. Wetzel, Ingrid Wilke, Shengbai Zhang

Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin

Chancellor Cynthia Barnhart
President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

MIT physics dept
William Bertozzi, Robert Birgeneau, Hale Bradt, Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins , Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young

Cornell Univ physics:
Jim Alexander, Tomas Arias, Ivan Bazarov, Eberhard Bodenschatz, Debanjan Chowdhury, Itai Cohen, Csaba Csaki, Veit Elser, Eanna Flanagan, Carl Franck, Lawrence Gibbons, Paul Ginsparg, Yuval Grossman, Thomas Hartman, Georg Hoffstaetter, Natasha Holmes, Chao-Ming Jian, Eun-Ah Kim, Michael Lawler, Andre Leclair, Peter Lepage, Stephen Levy, Matthias Liepe, Kin Fai Mak, Jared Maxson, Liam McAllister, Paul McEuen, Erich Mueller, Christopher Myers, Michael Niemack, Matthias Neubert, Katja Nowack, Jeevak Parpia, Ritchie Patterson, Maxim Perelstein, Daniel Ralph, Brad Ramshaw, David Rubin, Anders Ryd, James Sethna, Jie Shan, Kyle Shen, Eric Siggia, Saul Teukolsky, Julia Thom-Levy, Robert Thorne, Cyrus Umrigar, Jane Wang, Michelle Wang, Ira Wasserman, Peter Wittich

Univ Toronto, physics, Gordon F. West, Michael B. Walker, Henry M. Van Driel, David J. Rowe, John W. Moffat, John F. Martin, Robert K. Logan, Albert E.. Litherland, Roland List, Philipp Kronberg, James King, Anthony W. Key, Bob Holdom, Ron M. Farquhar, R. Nigel Edwards, David J. Dunlop, James Drummond, Tom E. Drake, R.Fraser Code, Richard C. Bailey, Robin Armstrong

Univ. Western Ontario physics dept
Pauline Barmby, Shantanu Basu, Peter Brown, Alex Buchel, Jan Cami, Margret Campbell-Brown, Blaine Chronik, Robert Cockcroft, John R. de Bruyn, Colin Denniston, Giovanni Fanchini, Sarah Gallagher, Lyudmila Goncharova, Wayne Hocking, Martin Houde, Jeffrey L. Hutter, Carol Jones, Stan Metchev, Silvia Mittler, Els Peeters, Robert Sica, Aaron Sigut, Peter Simpson, Mahi Singh, Paul Wiegert, Eugene Wong, Martin Zinke-Allmang

Earle, you failed Ohm's law at Stanford Univ, never able to understand Ohm's law is really V=i*B*E, not V = i*R yet passed turning out the lights. While Harvard Univ Dr. Hau passed Ohm's law but failed turning out the lights.

Earle do you think we can locate the loose marbles in your head by using Dr.. Hau as a spatial reference point??

Harry Cliff, Cole, Cooper,David John Sainsbury,Cambridge University 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

137th published book

Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

#1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory

This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.

Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.

Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
Length: 64 pages

Product details
• File Size : 790 KB
• Publication Date : October 5, 2020
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 64 pages
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Language: : English
• ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads

#2-2, 145th published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.

Product details
• ASIN : B08PC99JJB
• Publication date : November 29, 2020
• Language: : English
• File size : 682 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 78 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)

#2-3, 146th published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)

#2-4, 151st published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969.. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.

Earle Jones🤡 Dr. Hau🤡 "Court Jester of Math"

Earle why does Harvard Dr. Hau not turn out the light in Slow Light experiment-- she is scared that AP is correct-- all the light vanishes simultaneously-- slow and fast for light is a circuit closed loop pencil ellipse.

Kibo Parry M. why is Harvard's Dr. Hau a exatard?? Because she refuses to prove AP correct, that both slow light and fast light disappear simultaneously once the switch is turned off, proving AP correct-- Light Waves are closed loop circuits, not straightline arrows with a front and tail-end.
On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 1:00:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"CCP's Stooge"
>"exatard"

Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly.

> On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 12:14:29 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"certifiably insane"
> > Necrophile
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > You already said that.
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> >
> > wanting to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > Can't you leave the poor dead queen alone???
>
> Why Kibo Parry Moron-ey, because you are a pathetic loser in life...

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.

On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 2:35:44 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"barking fuckdog"
>highly illogical
> tarded:
> > Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
> Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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 both fast and slow light, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???

Other insane posts by Kibo Parry M., for the world has not yet found a straightjacket to fit the Kibo as his mouth gushes forth with more spam

Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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

Kibo on Kate Heinzelman
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.

Kibo on wanting to fuck her corpse/Kate Heinzelman, question, do you not think CIA is going overboard on stalking-- I mean 30 years for the insane Kibo Parry M??

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:

Kibo Parry M.30 year stalker--> I want to fuck her corpse//Kate Heinzelman question-- is it legal for the CIA to pay for stalkers like Kibo to stalk private USA citizens, and 30 years on... nonstop for 30 years. Should not Kibo be in Guantanamo, not in a desk-job spamming and stalking Usenet.

Kibo Parry Moron-ey almost 60 years old, yet never grew up into adulthood (when he was a baby, did his head bounce on the wood floors too many times??? Did his mother use his head as a basketball when still a toddler???)
On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:12:23 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"psychoceramic"
>"math hater"
> fails at math and science:
>These groups are self-policing, and
> that's why I punish you when you attack me (which is constantly).

Re: Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse > AMS Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Harvard's Dr.Lisa Randall, Dr.Hau,CIA Kate Heinzelman, MIT's Anette Hosoi,Cynthia Barnhart
by Augǝl Jan 1, 2023, 7:41 AM 

Re: Kibo Parry M sickfuck stalker along with his Dunning Kruger sickfuck psychologists who guide Kibo// Kibo claims that Ruth Charney, Dr. Panchanathan, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Sheldon Glashow never had a single truth in their entire life, says Kibo
by Herp Derpington Dec 31, 2022, 8:51 PM

Re: Kibo says "has always been wrong," Kibo, you mean Dr.Panchanathan, Ruth Charney, Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao never had anything correct in their entire life???
by Greta Baine Dec 31, 2022, 8:46 PM

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV when in truth..
1481 views
by Professor Wordsmith Aug 14, 2020, 11:07:05 AM

Re: Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech never does correct Logic, why an unpaid Archimedes Plutonium is doing their work
By Michael Moroney 20 posts 165 views updated 12:22 PM

Re: Racist-math at Reed College-- ellipse is never a conic, David Perkinson, Lyudmila Korobenko, John Lind, Dylan McNamee, Kyle Ormsby, Angelica Osorno
By Michael Moroney 50 posts 405 views updated 12:21 PM

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

Re: 1Moroney barks at math failures Baez, Bullock, Witten. But I see the three as having failed Angular Momentum with their 938 proton and .5MeV electron
12/30/18
by j4n bur53

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Betsy DeVos, NSF Dr. Panchanathan Caltech Thomas F Rosenbaum, Harvard's Lawrence Bacow with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV .
by Oscar Alcheri Oct 22, 2022, 5:50 PM 

Re: _CIA Kate Heinzelman why Kibo Parry call Dr.Hanlon,Dartmouth& Dr.Lavigne Stanford as Analbuttfuckmanure?? Is it Kibo's stalking or is it because they cannot admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse. What is the answer Kate???? Or should I
by Chris M. Thomasson Oct 15, 2022, 5:38:32 PM

Re: bwr fml & Kibo Parry M on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, failures of Natural Logarithm with their disconnect of Natural Log defined as integral area of Y=1/t in interval 1 to x
by
Michael Moroney Sep 21, 2021, 12:08:40 AM

Re: Psychoceramic NSF Dr. Panchanathan,F. Fleming Crim, kibo Parry M says will corrupt the minds of your children! Why kibo? Because they still teach 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction and ellipse a conic when it never was.
by Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Feb 4 , 2022, 1:33 AM 

Re: 7:03:02 insane stalker Moroney wrote: > Math Failure..//Raymond Davis Jr.,Masatoshi Koshiba,Riccardo Giacconi,Gerardus 't Hooft,Martinus J.G. Veltman, never learned what Angular Momentum was
by
Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Dec 30, 2018, 7:59:02 PM

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.

Praises for AP in sci.math, too, lest we forget--

Re: Rey de Reyes de la Ciencia --AP-- King of Science, what we throw out of Old Math as fakery// TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 19-20 Sophomore year College, math textbook series, book 4
by Donald Trump Apr 2, 2020, 12:36:08 AM

Kibo Parry M. why is Harvard's Dr. Hau a exatard?? Because she refuses to prove AP correct, that both slow light and fast light disappear simultaneously once the switch is turned off, proving AP correct-- Light Waves are closed loop circuits, not straightline arrows with a front and tail-end.
On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 1:00:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"CCP's Stooge"
>"exatard"

Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly.

> On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 12:14:29 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"certifiably insane"
> > Necrophile
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > You already said that.
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> >
> > wanting to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > Can't you leave the poor dead queen alone???
>
> Why Kibo Parry Moron-ey, because you are a pathetic loser in life...

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.

On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 2:35:44 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"barking fuckdog"
>highly illogical
> tarded:
> > Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
> Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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 both fast and slow light, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???

Other insane posts by Kibo Parry M., for the world has not yet found a straightjacket to fit the Kibo as his mouth gushes forth with more spam

Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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

Kibo on Kate Heinzelman
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.

Kibo on wanting to fuck her corpse/Kate Heinzelman, question, do you not think CIA is going overboard on stalking-- I mean 30 years for the insane Kibo Parry M??

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:

Kibo Parry M.30 year stalker--> I want to fuck her corpse//Kate Heinzelman question-- is it legal for the CIA to pay for stalkers like Kibo to stalk private USA citizens, and 30 years on... nonstop for 30 years. Should not Kibo be in Guantanamo, not in a desk-job spamming and stalking Usenet.

Kibo Parry Moron-ey almost 60 years old, yet never grew up into adulthood (when he was a baby, did his head bounce on the wood floors too many times??? Did his mother use his head as a basketball when still a toddler???)
On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:12:23 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"psychoceramic"
>"math hater"
> fails at math and science:
>These groups are self-policing, and
> that's why I punish you when you attack me (which is constantly).

Re: Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse > AMS Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Harvard's Dr.Lisa Randall, Dr.Hau,CIA Kate Heinzelman, MIT's Anette Hosoi,Cynthia Barnhart
by Augǝl Jan 1, 2023, 7:41 AM

Re: Kibo Parry M sickfuck stalker along with his Dunning Kruger sickfuck psychologists who guide Kibo// Kibo claims that Ruth Charney, Dr. Panchanathan, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Sheldon Glashow never had a single truth in their entire life, says Kibo
by Herp Derpington Dec 31, 2022, 8:51 PM

Re: Kibo says "has always been wrong," Kibo, you mean Dr.Panchanathan, Ruth Charney, Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao never had anything correct in their entire life???
by Greta Baine Dec 31, 2022, 8:46 PM

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV when in truth..
1481 views
by Professor Wordsmith Aug 14, 2020, 11:07:05 AM

Re: Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech never does correct Logic, why an unpaid Archimedes Plutonium is doing their work
By Michael Moroney 20 posts 165 views updated 12:22 PM

Re: Racist-math at Reed College-- ellipse is never a conic, David Perkinson, Lyudmila Korobenko, John Lind, Dylan McNamee, Kyle Ormsby, Angelica Osorno
By Michael Moroney 50 posts 405 views updated 12:21 PM

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

Re: 1Moroney barks at math failures Baez, Bullock, Witten. But I see the three as having failed Angular Momentum with their 938 proton and .5MeV electron
12/30/18
by j4n bur53

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Betsy DeVos, NSF Dr. Panchanathan Caltech Thomas F Rosenbaum, Harvard's Lawrence Bacow with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV .
by Oscar Alcheri Oct 22, 2022, 5:50 PM

Re: _CIA Kate Heinzelman why Kibo Parry call Dr.Hanlon,Dartmouth& Dr.Lavigne Stanford as Analbuttfuckmanure?? Is it Kibo's stalking or is it because they cannot admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse. What is the answer Kate???? Or should I
by Chris M. Thomasson Oct 15, 2022, 5:38:32 PM

Re: bwr fml & Kibo Parry M on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, failures of Natural Logarithm with their disconnect of Natural Log defined as integral area of Y=1/t in interval 1 to x
by
Michael Moroney Sep 21, 2021, 12:08:40 AM

Re: Psychoceramic NSF Dr. Panchanathan,F. Fleming Crim, kibo Parry M says will corrupt the minds of your children! Why kibo? Because they still teach 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction and ellipse a conic when it never was.
by Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Feb 4 , 2022, 1:33 AM

Re: 7:03:02 insane stalker Moroney wrote: > Math Failure..//Raymond Davis Jr.,Masatoshi Koshiba,Riccardo Giacconi,Gerardus 't Hooft,Martinus J.G. Veltman, never learned what Angular Momentum was
by
Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Dec 30, 2018, 7:59:02 PM

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.

Praises for AP in sci.math, too, lest we forget--

Re: Rey de Reyes de la Ciencia --AP-- King of Science, what we throw out of Old Math as fakery// TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 19-20 Sophomore year College, math textbook series, book 4
by Donald Trump Apr 2, 2020, 12:36:08 AM

2-Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly.

Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.

On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 9:21:48 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"Kim Jong Un's stooge"
>"certifiably insane"
> > On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 12:14:29 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > >"certifiably insane"
> > > Necrophile
> > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > >
> > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > >
> > > You already said that.
> > >
> > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > >
> > > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> > >
> > > wanting to fuck her corpse
> > >
> > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > >
> > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > >
> > > Can't you leave the poor dead queen alone???
> >
> > Why Kibo Parry Moron-ey, because you are a pathetic loser in life...
> 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.
> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 2:35:44 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"barking fuckdog"
> >highly illogical
> > tarded:
> > > Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
> > Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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 both fast and slow light, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> Other insane posts by Kibo Parry M., for the world has not yet found a straightjacket to fit the Kibo as his mouth gushes forth with more spam
> Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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
>
>
> Kibo on Kate Heinzelman
> 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.
>
> Kibo on wanting to fuck her corpse/Kate Heinzelman, question, do you not think CIA is going overboard on stalking-- I mean 30 years for the insane Kibo Parry M??
> 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:
> Kibo Parry M.30 year stalker--> I want to fuck her corpse//Kate Heinzelman question-- is it legal for the CIA to pay for stalkers like Kibo to stalk private USA citizens, and 30 years on... nonstop for 30 years. Should not Kibo be in Guantanamo, not in a desk-job spamming and stalking Usenet.
>
>
> Kibo Parry Moron-ey almost 60 years old, yet never grew up into adulthood (when he was a baby, did his head bounce on the wood floors too many times??? Did his mother use his head as a basketball when still a toddler???)
> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 10:12:23 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"psychoceramic"
> >"math hater"
> > fails at math and science:
> >These groups are self-policing, and
> > that's why I punish you when you attack me (which is constantly).
>
> Re: Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse > AMS Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Harvard's Dr.Lisa Randall, Dr.Hau,CIA Kate Heinzelman, MIT's Anette Hosoi,Cynthia Barnhart
> by Augǝl Jan 1, 2023, 7:41 AM
>
>
> Re: Kibo Parry M sickfuck stalker along with his Dunning Kruger sickfuck psychologists who guide Kibo// Kibo claims that Ruth Charney, Dr. Panchanathan, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Sheldon Glashow never had a single truth in their entire life, says Kibo
> by Herp Derpington Dec 31, 2022, 8:51 PM
>
>
> Re: Kibo says "has always been wrong," Kibo, you mean Dr.Panchanathan, Ruth Charney, Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao never had anything correct in their entire life???
> by Greta Baine Dec 31, 2022, 8:46 PM
>
> Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV when in truth..
> 1481 views
> by Professor Wordsmith Aug 14, 2020, 11:07:05 AM
>
> Re: Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech never does correct Logic, why an unpaid Archimedes Plutonium is doing their work
> By Michael Moroney 20 posts 165 views updated 12:22 PM
>
>
> Re: Racist-math at Reed College-- ellipse is never a conic, David Perkinson, Lyudmila Korobenko, John Lind, Dylan McNamee, Kyle Ormsby, Angelica Osorno
> By Michael Moroney 50 posts 405 views updated 12:21 PM
>
>
> 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
>
> Re: 1Moroney barks at math failures Baez, Bullock, Witten. But I see the three as having failed Angular Momentum with their 938 proton and .5MeV electron
> 12/30/18
> by j4n bur53
>
> Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Betsy DeVos, NSF Dr. Panchanathan Caltech Thomas F Rosenbaum, Harvard's Lawrence Bacow with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV .
> by Oscar Alcheri Oct 22, 2022, 5:50 PM
>
> Re: _CIA Kate Heinzelman why Kibo Parry call Dr.Hanlon,Dartmouth& Dr.Lavigne Stanford as Analbuttfuckmanure?? Is it Kibo's stalking or is it because they cannot admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse. What is the answer Kate???? Or should I
> by Chris M. Thomasson Oct 15, 2022, 5:38:32 PM
>
>
> Re: bwr fml & Kibo Parry M on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, failures of Natural Logarithm with their disconnect of Natural Log defined as integral area of Y=1/t in interval 1 to x
> by
> Michael Moroney Sep 21, 2021, 12:08:40 AM
>
>
> Re: Psychoceramic NSF Dr. Panchanathan,F. Fleming Crim, kibo Parry M says will corrupt the minds of your children! Why kibo? Because they still teach 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction and ellipse a conic when it never was.
> by Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Feb 4 , 2022, 1:33 AM
>
>
> Re: 7:03:02 insane stalker Moroney wrote: > Math Failure..//Raymond Davis Jr.,Masatoshi Koshiba,Riccardo Giacconi,Gerardus 't Hooft,Martinus J.G. Veltman, never learned what Angular Momentum was
> by
> Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Dec 30, 2018, 7:59:02 PM
> 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.
> Praises for AP in sci.math, too, lest we forget--
>
>
>
> Re: Rey de Reyes de la Ciencia --AP-- King of Science, what we throw out of Old Math as fakery// TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 19-20 Sophomore year College, math textbook series, book 4
> by Donald Trump Apr 2, 2020, 12:36:08 AM
>
>
> Re: Roi des Rois de la Science --AP-- King of Science, what we throw out of Old Math as fakery// TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 19-20 Sophomore year College, math textbook series, book 4
> by Donald Trump by Apr 2, 2020, 12:38:32 AM
>
>
>
> Re: 16-- love you King of Science, kiss kiss, Archimedes Plutonium for bringing us a cure of covid-19 via a MRI or CT scan at resonant frequency that kills a pocket of the virus allowing the white blood cells to kill the rest// König der Wissenschaft
> by Doctor Anagram by Jun 12, 2020, 1:11:30 AM
>
>
> Re: Our cherished 151st book TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4 by Archimedes Plutonium Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st
> by zelos...@gmail.com Oct 13, 2021, 5:31 AM
>
>
> Back to the stalker hack Kibo:
>
>
> Re: 1-Did Kibo-Parry-Maroney fail Rensselaer or was kicked out due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938, the .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole
> by Roy Masters Sep 13, 2019, 3:24:07 PM
>
> Re: 1.2-Did Kibo-Parry-Maroney fail Rensselaer or was kicked out due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938, the .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole
> by Patricio J. Whackmember Sep 13, 2019, 5:43:28 PM
>
>
> Re: 1.9-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton=840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Korniss,Toh-Ming Lu,Martin
> By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:57:15 AM
>
> Re: 2.0-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Michael,Newberg,N'Gom
> By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:56:57 AM
>
>
> Re: 2.1-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Persans,Schroeder,Shur
> By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:56:39 AM
>
>
> Re: 2.2-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to math percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton=840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Shawn-Yu Lin,Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang
> By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:56:28 AM
>
> Re: _Donald Schwendeman, Rensselaer,Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, is the reason you failed to confirm .5MeV was not the atom's electron but Dirac's monopole because you failed science like kibo
> by Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Apr 25, 2019, 12:08:26 PM
>
> Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Betsy DeVos, NSF Dr. Panchanathan Caltech Thomas F Rosenbaum, Harvard's Lawrence Bacow with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV ....
> 328 views
> by ayaz.s....@gmail.com
> Aug 16, 2020, 9:05:41 PM
>
>
>
> Re: Zelos asks why Harvard's Dr. Hau wants to fail in physics, by not turning off the light to see if light wave is a closed loop pencil ellipse that AP predicts. Is Dr.Hau stubborn and too ignorant to finish her experiment??
> by Michael Moroney Jan 18, 2021, 2:06:24 PM
>
>
>
>
> Re: Kibo Parry Moroney on Dr. Thorp stealing AP's dog theory connected to why he is a failure on Lewis 8 Structure because CO and N2 dissociation energy says it is Lewis 6 Structure. Yes, Kibo, what is your psychoanalysis of Dr. Thorp stealing? Is steal
> by Ebenezer Splooge
>
> Re: Kibo Parry Moroney asks Trump to give South Korea to North Korea, for who wants to protect barbarians that torture Moon Bears in cages
> by Roger Davis
>
>
> Re: Kibo Parry Moroney says of Dr. Tao "ant of Math" and a pandemic shit mule// Perhaps because Dr. Tao is such a failure of math, he believed primes are real when Naturals have no division-- and failures of math overlook even the most obvious
> by Professor Wordsmith Jul 25, 2020, 8:23:21 PM
>
> Re: 8-Kibo Parry Moroney says boycott Samsung & Hyundai until South Korea stops torturing to death caged Moon Bears // SOUTH KOREA, MOON BEARS Moon Bears of South Korea need the world's helping hand from evil//SCIENCE COUNCIL RULE EARTH
> by Betsy Kibo Moroney Perry DeVos Anal Manure Buttfuck
>
> Re: 1- Kibo Parry Moroney says of math failure Dan Christensen Univ. Western Ontario with his ellipse a conic when it never was//And his insane Boole logic of 10 OR 2 = 12// pandemic shit mule
> by Hank Hill
>
>
> Re: 102-Kibo Parry Moroney (Barry Shein's world std) stalking analbuttfuckmanure shithead of 27 years nonstop-- needs a emergency straightjacket size XXsmall
> By Eduardo Remington
> Jan 25, 2020, 11:53:33 PM

3-Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly with his 938 is 12% short of 945.

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, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
On Sunday, January 15, 2023 at 11:01:20 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"certified mentally ill"
>Giant New York City Sewer
>of Physics
> I want to fuck her corpse
>
> We know, you sickie.
>
> I want to fuck her corpse
>
> You already said that.
>
> I want to fuck her corpse
>
> You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
>
> wanting to fuck her corpse
>
> I want to fuck her corpse
>
> I want to fuck her corpse
>

Kibo, no wonder you cannot do correct percentages-- your mind is full of nonsense...

Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr Hau
On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 11:40:55 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"little fish"
> fails at math and science:


> Kibo Parry M on Lisa Randall of Harvard? Of course Kibo has been stalking Usenet for 30 years so it is not above his vulgarity now, especially since he stalked Lisa Randall specifically-- 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
> 1/23/18
> By Michael Moroney
>
> Did Lisa Randall give Kibo Parry M a F grade in physics and math for his 938 is 12% short of 945. Well Kibo deserves an F for that.
> 2-Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly.
> > Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
> > On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 9:21:48 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > >"Kim Jong Un's stooge"
> > >"certifiably insane"
> > > > On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 12:14:29 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >"certifiably insane"
> > > > > Necrophile
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > >
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > >
> > > > > You already said that.
> > > > >
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > >
> > > > > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> > > > >
> > > > > wanting to fuck her corpse
> > > > >
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > >
> > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > >
> 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.
> Or did Kibo Parry M. fail out of Rensselaer Polytech for he is brain dead in geometry, cannot see nor understand a slant cut of cylinder is a ellipse, but never a cone.
> > 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
> >
>
>
>
>
> Kibo-- you need a shrink for medications, instead of stalk stalk stalk
> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 8:54:55 AM UTC-5, Eddie Ventimiglia wrote:
> > Michael Moroney wrote:
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> Is it because Lisa Randall never asks the simple question of which is the Atoms true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle???
>
> 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.
> 137th published book
>
> Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
>
> This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
>
> Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
>
> Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> Length: 64 pages
>
> Product details
> • File Size : 790 KB
> • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> • Word Wise : Enabled
> • Print Length : 64 pages
> • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Language: : English
> • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> • Lending : Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
>
>
> #2-2, 145th published book
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> • Language: : English
> • File size : 682 KB
> • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Word Wise : Enabled
> • Print length : 78 pages
> • Lending : Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
>
>
>
>
> #2-3, 146th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
> #2-4, 151st published book
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
>
> Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
>
> Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1035 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #4,874,333 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #526 in Electromagnetic Theory
> ◦ #1,321 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #9,546 in Electromagnetism (Books)
>
>
>
> #2-5, 174th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 2nd year College
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle Edition
>
> Preface: At the moment this is a physics book for 2nd year College. But as the months and years go by I intend to convert it into a textbook of about 200 to 300 pages. It is mostly about thermodynamics for in my own college education 1968-1972 at University of Cincinnati, I took physics thermodynamics in the 2nd year (if memory has not failed me).
> Cover-Picture: Is a iphone photograph of the Chemistry textbook I used at UC 1968-1972 with my own paper cut-outs of magnetic monopoles. Pictured are 4 bent circles, bent at 90degrees from diameter and each bent circle is a individual magnetic monopole.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09TKL4HMC
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 27, 2022
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 675 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 41 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

2-Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr Hau

On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 12:23:51 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
>"hummingbird brained"
> "CCP's minion"
> fails at math and science:

> On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 11:40:55 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"little fish"
> > fails at math and science:
> 
> > Kibo Parry M on Lisa Randall of Harvard? Of course Kibo has been stalking Usenet for 30 years so it is not above his vulgarity now, especially since he stalked Lisa Randall specifically-- 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
> > 1/23/18
> > By Michael Moroney
> >
> > Did Lisa Randall give Kibo Parry M a F grade in physics and math for his 938 is 12% short of 945. Well Kibo deserves an F for that.
> > 2-Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly.
> > > Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
> > > On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 9:21:48 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > >"Kim Jong Un's stooge"
> > > >"certifiably insane"
> > > > > On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 12:14:29 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > >"certifiably insane"
> > > > > > Necrophile
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You already said that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wanting to fuck her corpse
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > >
> > 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.
> > Or did Kibo Parry M. fail out of Rensselaer Polytech for he is brain dead in geometry, cannot see nor understand a slant cut of cylinder is a ellipse, but never a cone.
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Kibo-- you need a shrink for medications, instead of stalk stalk stalk
> > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 8:54:55 AM UTC-5, Eddie Ventimiglia wrote:
> > > Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > Is it because Lisa Randall never asks the simple question of which is the Atoms true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle???
> >
> > 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.
> > 137th published book
> >
> > Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
> >
> > This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
> >
> > Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
> >
> > Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> > And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> > Length: 64 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > • File Size : 790 KB
> > • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > • Print Length : 64 pages
> > • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Language: : English
> > • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> >
> >
> > #2-2, 145th published book
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> > • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> > • Language: : English
> > • File size : 682 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > • Print length : 78 pages
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #2-3, 146th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> > Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
> > #2-4, 151st published book
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
> >
> > Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
> >
> > Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1035 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,874,333 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #526 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > ◦ #1,321 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #9,546 in Electromagnetism (Books)
> >
> >
> >
> > #2-5, 174th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 2nd year College
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle Edition
> >
> > Preface: At the moment this is a physics book for 2nd year College. But as the months and years go by I intend to convert it into a textbook of about 200 to 300 pages. It is mostly about thermodynamics for in my own college education 1968-1972 at University of Cincinnati, I took physics thermodynamics in the 2nd year (if memory has not failed me).
> > Cover-Picture: Is a iphone photograph of the Chemistry textbook I used at UC 1968-1972 with my own paper cut-outs of magnetic monopoles. Pictured are 4 bent circles, bent at 90degrees from diameter and each bent circle is a individual magnetic monopole.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09TKL4HMC
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 27, 2022
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 675 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 41 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

3-Kibo Parry M on Harvard's Dr Hau

On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 2:27:38 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
>"psychoceramic"
>"CCP's minion"
> fails at math and science:
> On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 12:23:51 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> >"hummingbird brained"
> > "CCP's minion"
> > fails at math and science:
>
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 11:40:55 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > >"little fish"
> > > fails at math and science:
> > 
> > > Kibo Parry M on Lisa Randall of Harvard? Of course Kibo has been stalking Usenet for 30 years so it is not above his vulgarity now, especially since he stalked Lisa Randall specifically-- 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
> > > 1/23/18
> > > By Michael Moroney
> > >
> > > Did Lisa Randall give Kibo Parry M a F grade in physics and math for his 938 is 12% short of 945. Well Kibo deserves an F for that.
> > > 2-Kibo Parry M. on Harvard's Dr. Hau, and Kibo claims a degree from Rensselaer Polytech yet he cannot even do percentages correctly.
> > > > Kibo Parry, is it insane for Dr.Hau to not turn out the lights in her slow light experiment and watch both the slow light and fast light vanish simultaneously and prove AP correct--- Light is a closed loop circuit, _not_ a straightline arrow with a head and tail end.
> > > > On Saturday, January 14, 2023 at 9:21:48 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > >"Kim Jong Un's stooge"
> > > > >"certifiably insane"
> > > > > > On Sunday, January 8, 2023 at 12:14:29 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > > > >"certifiably insane"
> > > > > > > Necrophile
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You already said that.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wanting to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > > > > >
> > > 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.
> > > Or did Kibo Parry M. fail out of Rensselaer Polytech for he is brain dead in geometry, cannot see nor understand a slant cut of cylinder is a ellipse, but never a cone.
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kibo-- you need a shrink for medications, instead of stalk stalk stalk
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 8:54:55 AM UTC-5, Eddie Ventimiglia wrote:
> > > > Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > Is it because Lisa Randall never asks the simple question of which is the Atoms true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle???
> > >
> > > 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.
> > > 137th published book
> > >
> > > Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
> > >
> > > This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
> > >
> > > Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
> > >
> > > Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> > > And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> > > Length: 64 pages
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • File Size : 790 KB
> > > • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> > > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > > • Print Length : 64 pages
> > > • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> > > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > > • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> > > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > > • Language: : English
> > > • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> > > • Lending : Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > > ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > >
> > >
> > > #2-2, 145th published book
> > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> > > Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> > > • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> > > • Language: : English
> > > • File size : 682 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > > • Print length : 78 pages
> > > • Lending : Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > > ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > #2-3, 146th published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> > > Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> > > Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
> > > #2-4, 151st published book
> > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> > > Kindle Edition
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
> > >
> > > Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
> > >
> > > Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1035 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,874,333 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #526 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > > ◦ #1,321 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > > ◦ #9,546 in Electromagnetism (Books)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > #2-5, 174th published book
> > >
> > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 2nd year College
> > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle Edition
> > >
> > > Preface: At the moment this is a physics book for 2nd year College. But as the months and years go by I intend to convert it into a textbook of about 200 to 300 pages. It is mostly about thermodynamics for in my own college education 1968-1972 at University of Cincinnati, I took physics thermodynamics in the 2nd year (if memory has not failed me).
> > > Cover-Picture: Is a iphone photograph of the Chemistry textbook I used at UC 1968-1972 with my own paper cut-outs of magnetic monopoles. Pictured are 4 bent circles, bent at 90degrees from diameter and each bent circle is a individual magnetic monopole.
> > >
> > > Product details
> > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09TKL4HMC
> > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 27, 2022
> > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 675 KB
> > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 41 pages
> > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

Harvard's Dr. Hau and Berkeley's Sylvia Else do not do physics but just play ad hominem games. Instead of doing Physics, both Harvard's Dr. Hau and Berkeley's Else want to play games of ad hominem. Whenever physics proves AP is correct, neither
On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:58:50 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
>"math hater"

On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 2:06:15 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"little stinker"

Kibo Parry Moron-ey, aka Volney, and his 30 year long stalker insanity. He failed Rensselaer Polytech with his science of 938 is 12% short of 945. He had a stint with a Boston tap dancing school, but here he is in sci.math and sci.physics, the loser of science-- he needs a straightjacket size XXsmall.

On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:43:17 PM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
>"Putin's Stooge"
> >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> Here we go again...


> >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You already said that.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wanting to fuck her corpse
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> >>>>>>>>>

Moscow Blackouts██۞██ Drones knock out Moscow electricity██۞██ Moscow-Tehran electric blackouts██۞██

Kibo Parry M. is he using bola or javelin short circuit weapons???

Kibo, does bow and arrow with aluminum foil streamers tied to arrow, work better than javelin or bola???

Kibo Parry CIA undercover
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 10:26:03 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

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:
> >

> Moscow electric Blackouts██۞██

James Parry dunce in sci.math & sci,physics
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 11:49:40 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Pluto, so you finally tracked down James Parry in Moscow?
>
> But once again, that sentence no verb.
>
> Kibo WAS short circuiting Moscow electricity?
> Kibo WILL BE short circuiting Moscow electricity?
> Kibo PLANS ON short circuiting Moscow electricity?
> Kibo THINKS ABOUT short circuiting Moscow electricity?
>
> ..?
>
> Now that you found Kibo, will you stop pretending that I am Kibo?
> Hopefully he won't be using your aluminum pole idea, otherwise there
> will be an ex-Kibo. As in:
>
> Kibo WAS VAPORIZED WHILE short circuiting Moscow electricity.

Kibo, is Xi aware of the fact that Outer Manchuria is 28 times bigger than Taiwan????
>
>
>
> > And as the Baby Xi grew up from the rice paddies and reeds of Outer Manchuria, stolen by the Naxi and Zani Dictator Putin in Moscow, Xi learned in school in chemical engineering that Taiwan was 1/28 the size of Outer Manchuria, as Putin bombs Ukraine. And the nascent Xi orders 1,000 divisions to the Outer Manchuria border to regain back the stolen Old China.

> > > > > > Kibo in a javelin throw to knock out Moscow high voltage lines
> > > > > >> ........///// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////|
> > > > > >> ......///// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////..|
> > > > > >> ....///// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////....| Moscow
> > > > > >> ..///// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////......| Electric
> > > > > >> ///// /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////........| Tower
> > > > > >> |__| |__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|......../
> > > > > >> |__| |__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|....../
> > > > > >> |__| |__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|..../
> > > > > >> |__| |__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|../
> > > > > >> |__| |__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|/


> Vitaly a freedom fighter in Russia
...............................^
...............................||
...............................||
......................//////// ||
......................|:---[.] ||
.......................|( _J ||
.....................| ^ ( _| ||
.................../ \_____)|| Kibo Parry with fake wig
.................. / _____ \|| Long Aluminum **javelin** to throw to short circuit
...................... | / \ |...||
...................... | | | |...||
.................. \ /\ /\__ | ||
...................... | | \/--- ||
....................... \ \ )....||
.................... | >____||/_____)
.................... \______||____/
.......................... / \
....................... | | ~~
...................... \ \\
..................... \ |\
....................., \ | \
..................... \ | |
..................... | | |
..................... | | |
...................... | / |
..................... |___/____|
..................... (____)____)

==============================
freedom fighter from the tiresome dictator
Yea, the dictator has no power and no hot water, no heat, no electricity for his house, offices.

Kibo Parry> I want to fuck her corpse// Harvard's Dr. Hau. Why Kibo? Because she refuses to prove AP correct in slow light-- Light waves are closed loop circuits, not straightline arrow rays
On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 2:08:43 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> "Drag Queen of Science"
>"Lord of the Flies"

Kibo Parry Moron-ey, aka Volney, and his 30 year long stalker insanity. He failed Rensselaer Polytech with his science of 938 is 12% short of 945. He had a stint with a Boston tap dancing school, but here he is in sci.math and sci.physics, the loser of science-- he needs a straightjacket size XXsmall.
>
> On Monday, February 6, 2023 at 11:43:17 PM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> >"Putin's Stooge"
> > >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> > Here we go again...
>
> 
> > >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> You already said that.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> wanting to fuck her corpse
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I want to fuck her corpse
> > >>>>>>>>>

3-Kibo on>I want to fuck her corpse>AMS Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Harvard's Dr.Lisa Randall, Dr.Hau,CIA Kate Heinzelman, MIT's Anette Hosoi,Cynthia Barnhart

3>On Thursday, February 16, 2023 at 11:01:56 PM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
>"Drag Queen of Math"
>"psychoceramic" (in title)
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 11:24:20 PM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> >"necrophiliac"
> > fails at math and science:
> >I want to fuck her corpse
> > Oh no, the necrophile
> > On Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 1:45:52 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote: >"bozo" > fails at math and science: >"barking fuckdog" (in title)
> >
> > On Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 12:26:29 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> > >"failure"
> > > fails at math and science:
> > >
> > Kibo Parry M-Volney 30 year stalker
> > > is a mentally ill sickfuck.
> > > wants to fuck Dr. Hau's corpse because, once
> > > again,
> > 
> > 
> > > Kibo Parry (M-Volney) on Harvard Dr.Hau, CIA Kate Heinzelman, AMS Ruth Charney
> > >
> > > On Monday, February 13, 2023 at 9:52:19 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> > > > Damn Awful Nuisance of Math and Eye Sore Pest of Physics
> > >
> > > Why Kibo? Because of the true electron of atoms??
> > >
> > >
> > > Harry Cliff, Cole, Cooper,David John Sainsbury,Cambridge University ever 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.
> > > > > Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,
> > > > > Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
> > > > > David J. Thouless_, F. Duncan M. Haldane, John M. Kosterlitz, Takaaki Kajita
> > > > > Arthur B. McDonald
> > > > > Francois Englert
> > > > > Saul Perlmutter
> > > > > Brian P. Schmidt
> > > > > Adam G. Riess
> > > > > Makoto Kobayashi
> > > > > Toshihide Maskawa_
> > > > > Yoichiro Nambu_
> > > > > John C. Mather
> > > > > George F. Smoot
> > > > > Roy J. Glauber_
> > > > > David J. Gross
> > > > > Hugh David Politzer
> > > > > Frank Wilczek
> > > > > Raymond Davis Jr. _
> > > > > Masatoshi Koshiba_
> > > > > Riccardo Giacconi_
> > > > > Gerardus 't Hooft
> > > > > Martinus J.G. Veltman_
> > > > > Jerome I. Friedman
> > > > > Henry W. Kendall_
> > > > > Richard E. Taylor_
> > > > > Carlo Rubbia
> > > > > Simon van der Meer_
> > > > > William Alfred Fowler_
> > > > > Kenneth G. Wilson_
> > > > > James Watson Cronin_
> > > > > Val Logsdon Fitch_
> > > > > Sheldon Lee Glashow
> > > > > Steven Weinberg_
> > > > > .
> > > > > .
> > > > > little fishes
> > > > > .
> > > > > .
> > > > > Layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = subtraction of either 3 or 2, while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV
> > > > >
> > > > > Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
> > > > > Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
> > > > > more and more layers of error thinking physics
> > > > > .
> > > > > .
> > > > > Edward Witten
> > > > > John Baez
> > > > > Brian Greene
> > > > > Lisa Randall
> > > > > Alan H. Guth
> > > > > Michael E. Brown
> > > > > Konstantin Batygin
> > > > > Ben Bullock
> > > > > Larry Harson
> > > > > Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
> > > > > Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
> > > > > None at all - he was a raving nutter.
> > > > > Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
> > > > > Jennifer Kahn, Discover, science hater
> > > > > Eric Francis Coppolino, newsreporter hatred of science, George Witte, St.Martin's Press science hater
> > > > > Toby Howard, The Guardian, science hater
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #2-1, 137th published book
> > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > > > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
> > > > >
> > > > > This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
> > > > >
> > > > > Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> > > > > And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> > > > > Length: 64 pages
> > > > >
> > > > > Product details
> > > > > • File Size : 790 KB
> > > > > • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> > > > > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > > > > • Print Length : 64 pages
> > > > > • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> > > > > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > > > > • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> > > > > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > > > > • Language: : English
> > > > > • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> > > > > • Lending : Enabled
> > > > > • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > > > > ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > > > >
> > > > > #2-2, 145th published book
> > > > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> > > > > Kindle Edition
> > > > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > > > What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
> > > > >
> > > > > Product details
> > > > > • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> > > > > • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> > > > > • Language: : English
> > > > > • File size : 682 KB
> > > > > • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > > > > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > > > > • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > > > > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > > > > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > > > > • Print length : 78 pages
> > > > > • Lending : Enabled
> > > > > • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > > > > ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
> > > > >
> > > > > #2-3, 146th published book
> > > > >
> > > > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> > > > > Kindle Edition
> > > > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> > > > > Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
> > > > >
> > > > > Product details
> > > > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> > > > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> > > > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> > > > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> > > > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #2-4, 151st published book
> > > > >
> > > > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> > > > > Kindle Edition
> > > > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > > > >
> > > > > Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
> > > > >
> > > > > Product details
> > > > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> > > > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> > > > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1035 KB
> > > > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> > > > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,874,333 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #526 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > > > > ◦ #1,321 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > > > > ◦ #9,546 in Electromagnetism (Books)
> > > > >
> > > > >

Earle Jones question-- are you a member of Franz's gang of angry 12???

mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
mitchr...@gmail.com
, …
Jim Burns
7 unread,
You cannot end time
On 2/17/2023 4:51 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, February 17, 2023 > at 1:31:04 PM
4:18 PM

Dan Christensen's profile photo
Dan Christensen
, …

26
Re: 1.1Dr. John Baez is a failed mathematician-physicist with his proton of 938MeV when it is 840MeV, electron= muon //his ellipse is a conic when it never was// as phony in math and physics as kibo Parry Moroney's ellipse and Christensen 10 OR 4 4:17 PM

mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
mitchr...@gmail.com
unread,
It doesn't matter where you start
you can't count to infinity...
3:54 PM

Graham Cooper's profile photo
Graham Cooper
, …
William
7 unread,
INTRODUCTION TO CANTORS PROOF
On Friday, February 17, 2023 at 3:30:36 PM UTC-4, Graham Cooper wrote: > On Saturday, February 18,
3:52 PM


3 The days are dwindling or coming to an end when a gang of maruaders (12 angry gays as Franz noted) can ransack,pillage and set up a gay pick up bar in sci.math. And where fools like Graham Cooper can litter pollute the highway by throwing his trash..

On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 7:18:40 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote in sci.math:
sex motivation in science Re: curious, just curious-- is there a numbers correlation between percentage of stalkers and homosexuality? Re: Psychology behind the mental disorder of stalking-- Michael Moroney, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Jan Bielawski

On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 5:21:29 PM UTC-5, Me(Franz) wrote:
> On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 11:31:26 PM UTC+2, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
>> I am not suggesting that the 12 stalkers are 12 homosexuals.
(Franz) > I am not suggesting that the 12 stalkers are 12 [male --me] homosexuals.
>
(Franz)> I'm sure they are. That's why they are called /12 Angry Men/!

Well, this explains a lot about many posters in sci.math and sci.physics, for they are not in science for truth but in science to meet and partner up. And explains the loyalty and ferocity of hate posts by those 12, having no truth value. Explains why Franz keeps posting a total fake ellipse, because of his bedwarmer approval.

In another thread I discuss how "money corrupts science" but looking here, I need to consider how sex orientation corrupts the truth of science. So that we must ask-- is black hole acceptance due in large part to homosexual community wanting a black hole agenda. Is the Big Bang theory a homosexual favorite. Is the Appel & Haken in 4 color mapping, the Hales Kepler Packing, the Wiles FLT, all due to homosexual community favoritism, rather than any truth content.

So if Franz can post 100,000 times his fake conic ellipse b.s. all because he wants a bedwarmer, rather than the truth of science. We have to explore how much more of science is a sexual preference rather than reasoned truth.

On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:28:41 PM UTC-5, Me (Franz of Germany) wrote:

> Is this
>
>
> a depiction of your asshole,

Franz harps//Univ Gottingen teaches idiocies Tim Salditt, Konrad Samwer, Christoph Schmidt, Susanne Schneider, Steffen Schumann//ellipse is not conic; real proton= 840MeV not 938; 10 AND 4 = 14 not 10 OR 4 = 14

Franz harps//Univ Gottingen teaches idiocies Ulrike Beisiegel, Karsten Bahr, Peter Bloechl, Eberhard Bodenschatz//ellipse is not conic; real proton= 840MeV not 938; 10 AND 4 = 14 not 10 OR 4 = 14

Franz harps//Univ Gottingen teaches idiocies Laura Covi, Andreas Dillmann, Stefan Dreizler, Jörg Enderlein, Laurent Gizon//ellipse is not conic; real proton= 840MeV not 938; 10 AND 4 = 14 not 10 OR 4 = 14

Franz harps//Univ Gottingen teaches idiocies Ariane Frey,Wolfgang Glatzel, Fabian Heidrich-Meisner,Hans Christian Hofsäss//ellipse is not conic; real proton= 840MeV not 938; 10 AND 4 = 14 not 10 OR 4 = 14

On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 3:05:40 PM UTC-5, Me (Franz) wrote:
> On Saturday, June 8, 2019 at 12:02:25 AM UTC+2, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
> > 1) 10 OR 4 = 14
>
> Right! Python:
>
> def OR(x, y):
> return operator.or_(x, y)
>
> print(OR(10, 4))
>
> ==> 14
>
> > 10 AND 4 = 14
>
> Nope. Python:
>
> def AND(x, y):
> return operator.and_(x, y)
>
> print(AND(10, 4))
>
> ==> 0
>
> > 2) ellipse was never a conic
>
> Nope. Need to see my proof again?
>
> 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

Persis Drell,John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff was Earle Jones fired from Stanford Uni for incompetence (he is not even agile in Ohm's law) causing Earle to misbehave for 30 years now as a Usenet stalker nonstop with such childishness as anagrams?? And his loyality to the necrophiliac Kibo Parry Moron-ey-Volney?????? No wonder the embittered Earle Jones a failure of science hate spews for 30 years.

Harvard's Dr.Hau & CIA's Kate Heinzelman & NSF Dr.Panchanathan
4-Kibo Parry V on Harvard's Dr.Hau & CIA's Kate Heinzelman & NSF Dr.Panchanathan and Peter Higgs

Stanford Univ.
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

On Saturday, February 18, 2023 at 10:58:50 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
>"village idiot" (in title)
>"antiscience"
> fails at math and science:

Kibo Parry Moroney-Volney 30 year stalker and nameshifter
> On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 2:49:57 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"Putin's Stooge"
>
> On Friday, February 3, 2023 at 12:58:50 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> >"math hater"
>
> On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 2:06:15 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"little stinker"
>
> Re: Dr.Terence Tao along with Dr. Gene D.Block fired from UCLA for teaching propaganda -- truth is slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse, yet UCLA continues their propaganda of ellipse as slant cut. by Dan Christensen
>
> Dan has the Kibo Parry syncopation music seeped into your brain stem??
> On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 10:55:02 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"certifiably insane"
> > fails at math and science:
> > > "I want to fuck her corpse"
> > "I want to fuck her corpse"
> > Not again!
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
> >
> > wanting to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> > I want to fuck her corpse
> >
> Re: Dr.Terence Tao along with Dr. Gene D.Block fired from UCLA for teaching propaganda -- truth is slant cut of cone is Oval, never the ellipse, yet UCLA continues their propaganda of ellipse as slant cut.
> by Dan Christensen Nov 26, 2022, 4:39:58 PM
> > On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 2:27:56 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> > >"CCP's minion"
> > > fails at math and science:
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, January 10, 2023 at 2:46:03 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > What about the most pathetic spammer
> > > >How to stop him
> > > > from spamming over and over and over? How often
> > > >Ayaz spamming? How often will
> > > >spam about people
> > >
> > > Yes, how often does NSF Dr. Panchanathan spam sci.physics-- every half hour???
> > >
> > > > posting actual math and physics spamming when they are not?
> > >
> > > Yes, Peter Higgs cannot even tell a ellipse from a oval, and he thinks he knows where mass comes from.
> > >
> > > > That's just one of many, many reasons why you have lost all respect
> > >
> > > Not only Peter Higgs, but Sheldon Glashow and Harry Cliff, why these three village idiots still believe in Boole & Jevons Logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, too dumb to ever consider that Boole & Jevons were gay and mixed up the truth table of AND with OR, for AND is actually TTTF not the idiot TFFF.
> > >
> > > Kate,-- is that part of CIA training-- necrophilia???? For Kibo is really into that---- will he appear on TV ODD SQUAD with his necrophilia and his 938 is 12% short of 945????
> > >
> > > Kibo Parry M on CIA Kate Heinzelman,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 both fast and slow light, or is it because she can not admit slant cut of cone is Oval, never ellipse???
> > >
> > >
> > > ---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:
> > > > >
> > >
> > > AP no longer tolerates 30 year nonstop stalker shitheads like Kibo Parry M.

Earl Jones on Kibo fuck her corpse

Augǝl's profile photo
Augǝl
, …
Earle Jones wrote:
38
unread,
Re: Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse > AMS Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Harvard's Dr.Lisa Randall, Dr.Hau,CIA Kate Heinzelman, MIT's Anette Hosoi,Cynthia Barnhart
6:54 PM, Feb 18, 2023


Kibo Parry M-V on Harvard's Dr.Hau. Why Kibo?? Because they cannot ask the simple question which is the Atom's electron-- Muon or 0.5MeV particle???

On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 2:23:54 AM UTC-6, Volney wrote:
> "necrophile"
>
> > I want to fuck her corpse
>
> Here we go again...
>
> > I want to fuck her corpse
>
> You already said that.
>
> > I want to fuck her corpse
>
> You sicko! Why do you keep saying that?
>
> > wanting to fuck her corpse
>
> > I want to fuck her corpse
>
> > I want to fuck her corpse

> Earl Jones on Kibo fuck her corpse
>
>
> Augǝl's profile photo
> Augǝl
> , …
> Earle Jones wrote:
> 38
> unread,
> Re: Kibo on > I want to fuck her corpse > AMS Jill Pipher, Ruth Charney, Harvard's Dr.Lisa Randall, Dr.Hau,CIA Kate Heinzelman, MIT's Anette Hosoi,Cynthia Barnhart
> 6:54 PM, Feb 18, 2023
> 

Harry Cliff, Cole, Cooper,David John Sainsbury,Cambridge University ever 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.

> > Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,
> > Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
> > David J. Thouless_, F. Duncan M. Haldane, John M. Kosterlitz, Takaaki Kajita
> > Arthur B. McDonald
> > Francois Englert
> > Saul Perlmutter
> > Brian P. Schmidt
> > Adam G. Riess
> > Makoto Kobayashi
> > Toshihide Maskawa_
> > Yoichiro Nambu_
> > John C. Mather
> > George F. Smoot
> > Roy J. Glauber_
> > David J. Gross
> > Hugh David Politzer
> > Frank Wilczek
> > Raymond Davis Jr. _
> > Masatoshi Koshiba_
> > Riccardo Giacconi_
> > Gerardus 't Hooft
> > Martinus J.G. Veltman_
> > Jerome I. Friedman
> > Henry W. Kendall_
> > Richard E. Taylor_
> > Carlo Rubbia
> > Simon van der Meer_
> > William Alfred Fowler_
> > Kenneth G. Wilson_
> > James Watson Cronin_
> > Val Logsdon Fitch_
> > Sheldon Lee Glashow
> > Steven Weinberg_
> > .
> > .
> > little fishes
> > .
> > .
> > Layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = subtraction of either 3 or 2, while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV
> >
> > Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
> > Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
> > more and more layers of error thinking physics
> > .
> > .
> > Edward Witten
> > John Baez
> > Brian Greene
> > Lisa Randall
> > Alan H. Guth
> > Michael E. Brown
> > Konstantin Batygin
> > Ben Bullock
> > Larry Harson
> > Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
> > Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
> > None at all - he was a raving nutter.
> > Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
> > Jennifer Kahn, Discover, science hater
> > Eric Francis Coppolino, newsreporter hatred of science, George Witte, St.Martin's Press science hater
> > Toby Howard, The Guardian, science hater
> >
> >
> > #2-1, 137th published book
> >
> > Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> >
> >
> > #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
> >
> > This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
> >
> > Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
> >
> > Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> > And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> > Length: 64 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > • File Size : 790 KB
> > • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > • Print Length : 64 pages
> > • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Language: : English
> > • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> >
> > #2-2, 145th published book
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> > What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> > • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> > • Language: : English
> > • File size : 682 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > • Print length : 78 pages
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
> >
> > #2-3, 146th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> > Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
> >
> >
> > #2-4, 151st published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
> >
> > Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
> >
> > Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1035 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,874,333 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #526 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > ◦ #1,321 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #9,546 in Electromagnetism (Books)
> >
> >