Conversation in sci.physics with John Sylvester, 25May2023
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
4:21 PM (4 minutes ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Archimedes Plutonium
23 views
Subscribe

John Sylvester's profile photo
John Sylvester
8:36 AM (8 hours ago)



to
To Archimedes Plutonium,

I would like to have a conversation with you, if you don't mind, and ask you questions about your scientific theories. If you would be willing to, please contact me in this thread.

Best,

J. S.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
1:04 PM (3 hours ago)



to

Hi, John, thanks for the question. I am here in sci.physics every day of the year, a free and open channel is sci.physics. So fire away on any question. And if stalkers and hate mongers invade the thread, well, just ignore them.

Impossible to turn sci.physics, sci.math back to its pristine days of August 1993, but still, these two newsgroups are top communication of science, far better than any science book, science magazine, science research report. For the very best of all in science is now communicated over a Free & Open channel.

Fire away....

AP
John Sylvester's profile photo
John Sylvester
1:34 PM (3 hours ago)



to

Thanks for your response, AP.

I would like to ask you the following questions about sci.math and sci.physics, or Usenet in general. There are quite a few, please only answer those which you are comfortable with, in as much or little detail as you wish. Whatever insights you can give me are much appreciated.

-You seem to have been here for a very long time, you mention August 1993 - you're perhaps the longest continuous user of these forums. You talk about the pristine days and I've seen you speak about how nowadays they have devolved into a lot of spam. Do you know the reason why sci.math/sci.physics etc. devolved into spam, and/or can you pinpoint a rough date around which this occured?

-If you had to sum up the essentials of what the Plutonium Atom Totality is to someone, how would you do it? It seems to be a theory of yours that you are incredibly passionate about?

-What is your motivation for posting for so long? You seem very passionate about science, having posted thousands of times to Usenet. I'm curious as to what it is you wish to accomplish.

-I am aware of the fact that you have a conversation with Terence Tao. He's often heralded as one of the best mathematicians alive by the mainstream, although I am certain you would disagree with this. Could I ask you as to what your reflections on the conversation/debate you had with Terence Tao is, several years later? What are your main points of disagreement?

-Who is James "Kibo" Parry? I see this person mentioned an awful lot by multiple people including you. He has a Wikipedia page, from that and your posts/others posts here, I gather he was some kind of troll or comedic figure that created his own religion "Kibology". He does not seem to post here any more or be active anywhere under the Kibo name. Are you aware of what he was doing, or what happened to him?

-What are your thoughts on other frequent sci.math/physics figures? I am aware of John Gabriel and his new calculus, Dan Christensen with DC proof, and Amine Moulay Ramdane who posts a lot of philosophy and poems, among others.

-Are you aware of the song entitled "Archimedes Plutonium" by "Ramona Falls"? I spoke to the musician who created it, and have confirmed they named it after you. Here is a link to it on Sound Cloud.... Also, what do you think of it?

-Is there anything else you would like to mention, for someone who would be interested in getting to know what you or your work is about?

Thank you very much for being open about this. I look forward to your response.

Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
4:31 PM (3 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe

Archimedes Plutonium
1:56 PM (2 hours ago)



to
Hi, a lot of questions here, John, and will answer all of them, but not all at once. Each question deserves some lengthy time response. So will answer them all, but over time.

On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:34:04 PM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 7:04:52 PM UTC+1, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 8:36:38 AM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> > > To Archimedes Plutonium,
> > >
> > > I would like to have a conversation with you, if you don't mind, and ask you questions about your scientific theories. If you would be willing to, please contact me in this thread.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > J. S.
> > Hi, John, thanks for the question. I am here in sci.physics every day of the year, a free and open channel is sci.physics. So fire away on any question. And if stalkers and hate mongers invade the thread, well, just ignore them.
> >
> > Impossible to turn sci.physics, sci.math back to its pristine days of August 1993, but still, these two newsgroups are top communication of science, far better than any science book, science magazine, science research report. For the very best of all in science is now communicated over a Free & Open channel.
> >
> > Fire away....
> >
> > AP
> Thanks for your response, AP.
>
> I would like to ask you the following questions about sci.math and sci.physics, or Usenet in general. There are quite a few, please only answer those which you are comfortable with, in as much or little detail as you wish. Whatever insights you can give me are much appreciated.
>

I am comfortable with all questions, provided they are serious and sincere.

> -You seem to have been here for a very long time, you mention August 1993 - you're perhaps the longest continuous user of these forums. You talk about the pristine days and I've seen you speak about how nowadays they have devolved into a lot of spam. Do you know the reason why sci.math/sci.physics etc. devolved into spam, and/or can you pinpoint a rough date around which this occured?
>

Yes, I wrote a book on this question of yours. For when I came to Usenet in 1993, there was a sea change about 1996, where it seemed as though dot edu addresses by posters with real true names and the colleges and universities they were posting from seemed to abruptly stop. Few edu addresses, after 1996 and by early 2000, only a handful of posters with dot edu addresses, and most posters with fake names.

I lived through Usenet from August 1993 to present, almost every day.

And what I attribute the decline of dot edu address and real true names is the incursion of police, FBI, CIA drag net spam. Not the stalkers and stupid spammers on topic. But from drag net spam by government and police. My book gives details of this spam. And now today, anyone can look at the bombed out husk of a shell of sci.chem newsgroup. Not long before you reach posters like FBInCIAnNSA...... posters to tell you that there is no chemistry in sci.chem.

My 129th published book
Short History of Usenet, sci.physics, sci.math from 1993-2020, and its 90% decline// Sociology series, book 9

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Last revision was 6Jan2022. This is AP's 129th published book on science.

Preface: This book started out as a book on "stalking" but when Google revised its Google Newsgroup platform, with altogether different formatting, this book morphed into becoming a "90% demise of Usenet and sci.physics and sci.math in particular". In one of my posts on this book I said the title was going to change often until I actually write the book. And that is what happened. For in late December 2021, It was revealed to me that a persistent stalker under the name Michael Moroney (who stated in one of his stalking posts to be kibo, as in Kibo Parry) was posting from a CIA line in 1997. So that completes this history of Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics, as the demise is nearly all due to the fact that the constant and persistent police drag net spam chased most everyone else away, and most importantly the dot-edu address posters out of sci.math and sci.physics. Educated people just do not want to bother discussing physics or math while everywhere around is criss-crossed with vulgar police drag net spam.

Cover Picture: Is the newsgroup Plutonium-Atom-Universe that is fully controlled by the King of Science AP, Archimedes Plutonium. Every post in that newsgroup is about pure science, no ad hominem. And that is what the sci.physics and sci.math should be. Discussions on pure science, nothing else, and especially no ad hominem, no stalking, no spam, no off-topic junk, no solution manual selling, no drug selling, no police drag-net spam.

Product details
• Publication Date : August 31, 2020
• ASIN : B08H5B71M4
• File Size : 1045 KB
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print Length : 78 pages
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Language: : English
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
2:37 PM (2 hours ago)



to

JS> > -If you had to sum up the essentials of what the Plutonium Atom Totality is to someone, how would you do it? It seems to be a theory of yours that you are incredibly passionate about?
> >

Do you know the history of Paul Dirac, the exquisite physicist of 1900s? Paul was only a few of physicists who had logical intelligence along with physics intelligence. It is so so difficult to ever find a physicist who is good in logic along with good in physics.

Anyway, the story goes, if you know it, and all physicists should know Dirac's story. Is that Dirac sometime around 1930 had a sensation that the Magnetic Monopole must exist, for his logical mind said that if it did not exist, the symmetry of Physics and all of science is wacko-- out of line. The Maxwell Equations of Dirac's 1930s is anti-symmetrical and all of physics is anti-symmetrical. So, logic was driving Dirac. And you can read this in his Directions in Physics, 1975.

Few physicists, few scientists have logical intelligence to compliment their understanding of science. Anyway, Dirac looked and looked and looked and never found his Magnetic Monopole. But, it was all around him. It is the 0.5MeV particle, for J.J. Thomson in 1897 and then Rutherford and Bohr and all who came after made a huge mistake. They all thought, including Dirac, that the Thomson 0.5MeV particle was the electron of Atoms. No. They made a mistake. What Thomson discovered in 1897 was the Dirac magnetic monopole.

The true electron of atoms was discovered in the 1930s and it was named the Muon. But unknown to the physics community, that the muon was the true electron of Atoms.

So the story about Dirac, is he knew that the Magnetic Monopole must exist, because otherwise all of science has No-Symmetry, is ill-logical. It was the Logic driving Dirac.

Same thing goes for the greatest science theory of all time-- The Atomic theory by Ancient Greeks. One of them even espoused the Cosmic Atom, but of course, well, there was no Periodic Table of Chemical Elements back in Ancient Greek times.

So now, let me weave in Dirac and his magnetic monopole and AP with a Cosmic Atom, a single atom that is the entire Universe itself.

Is the logic of the world such that All is Atom, except for the Universe itself?? Or should the Logic be All is Atom and include the cosmos?

If the Universe is not a single atom, then we have to alter the Atomic Theory to make that exception. But, if the Universe itself is a single atom, one of the 118 elements of Chemistry. Then the Atomic Theory is 100% LOGICAL, with no exceptions.

I wrote many books on Atom Totality, and recently wrote my 231st book of science on this very subject of weaving Logic with Physics. No-one is a master at physics, if they lack a logical mind in doing physics. Dirac was a master in physics, as well as Feynmann. You do not have to go far in Feynman's Lectures on Physics to find that Feynman revered the Atomic Theory as the greatest single piece of science-- in fact page 1-2, volume 1, you find Feynman's reverance of the Atomic theory.

Summary:: The Atom Totality theory is logical, whereas anything else-- Big Bang, etc is illogical.

My 231st published book

All Things are made up of Atoms. The Universe is a Thing. Therefore the Universe is one single Atom of 231Plutonium // Logic

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Last revision was May 2023. And this is AP's 231st published book of science.

Preface: The last time I worked on this idea was 2017, when I wrote it in my 8th edition of Atom Totality. And when I wrote it there, I was wanting to switch out the term "things" for a more scientific term such as "matter". For I was not comfortable with All things are made up of Atoms-- The Universe is a thing, therefore the Universe is an Atom. The upshot of switching "things" for "matter" made it better, but never eased my discomfort. I still felt there was room for improvement in the syllogism. Here on, 6 years later, I have finally found what makes me totally comfortable about the syllogism I have in 2023. It is not the switching of terms, but rather the inclusion of both quantifiers into the syllogism. Inclusion of the "Every or All" Universal quantifier along with the Existential quantifier that solves the logic. It ends up with "All Existence..." And the case can be made in life in general-- if stumped by a problem, best lay it aside and let the mind in subconscious find the best answer. I know in projects around the house, if I jump into them immediately I often have to "undo" that work. But if I rest and sleep on the problem for 3 weeks, I find the best way to tackle the work. In this case, I rested on the problem for 6 years, and now reaping the rewards.

Archimedes Plutonium
12:29 AM, 26May2023



to
On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:34:04 PM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
(snipped)
> -Who is James "Kibo" Parry? I see this person mentioned an awful lot by multiple people including you. He has a Wikipedia page, from that and your posts/others posts here, I gather he was some kind of troll or comedic figure that created his own religion "Kibology". He does not seem to post here any more or be active anywhere under the Kibo name. Are you aware of what he was doing, or what happened to him?
>

He has been the main stalker of AP for 30 years nonstop. Almost everyday he has to add a reply to one or more of my threads, defiling and demonizing AP. Even if the thread is pure physics or pure math and no mention of Kibo. He started stalking my threads shortly after 1993, under the name James Kibo Parry, mocking my ideas and posts, following me even into my own newsgroup alt.plutonium.. which is since closed down. First it was mockery for years and not until 2016 when I no longer wanted to ignore these hate spews.

But Kibo seems to have some connection with the Gay community for a gang of known Gays is defended by Kibo. Witness:

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,

And this post by a Kibo ally.

On Monday, October 21, 2019 at 1:29:49 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> Are you ready, kids??? Bend over, er...
>
> Dan

So there seems to be a gang of attacker stalkers, for the moment I ridicule one, another 11 come in to defend him.

Then there was the time in middle 1990s that Wikipedia was doing a page on AP, and I was reading it and wanted to correct mistakes-- like nickname "Arky", and found that the entire page proposed to Wikipedia was a open page to where anyone in the world could add their "bit of hatred". So that Kibo was likely running a open hate mill on AP. That Wikipedia page still floats around in Wikimedia with the hatred nickname Arky.

So I figured that Kibo was with a gang of hate bullies, and every day and night, AP threads were bombed with hate spiel.

Then I was looking for old posts of Kibo, and found this curious old post suggesting Kibo was employed by the CIA.

Kibo in CIA
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:
> >

This then conjured up the image of a Kibo employed by CIA as likely operating their server with a gay gang of friends and at the end of a night shift, head back to sci.math and sci.physics and drop a bomb of hate in every AP thread.

Did Kibo and CIA pay these others to join in on hate attacks??

Here I had to ask what this connection was with NSF, government agency.

---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
NSF Dr. Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Olvestad, Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey, Scott Stanley
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

I had to question if NSF was paying Kibo, to bomb hate on AP threads and using std world as the control center all under the fake name Michael Moroney, now Volney.

And I do remember one Kibo ally of Dan Christensen, kibo's counterpart in Canada, saying he no longer could pay.

So saying he could no longer pay to attack AP, suggests that Kibo and Dan Christensen were paid to hate stalk AP starting in 1990s.

In 2016, I no longer was willing to ignore this hate stalk and made plans to get rid of these stalkers by my cunning and wits. Stalkers are dumb persons anyway, and I had to find some computer advantages.

I figured I would win in this battle because I was the only one doing math and physics, while this gang was doing nothing but hate. I asked Google engineers to make a level playing field to take on this gang. And they did provide me with the tool of deleting my own posts.

I would have prefered a greater tool that eradicates stalkers-- allow a original author to deny access to their thread. So that if another serious scientist wanted to reply to me, he/she would start their own thread calling on me to reply. That would be a engineering that eliminates all these hate spewing fools. But it slows down responses. But I rather have few responses or no responses than be interrupted by demonizing hatred, day in day out.

In 2016 or thereabouts I had another hate spewing fool stalk me everyday, John Baez, who had a fix on AP, much like Kibo. Thing is I got rid of John Baez by listing his University and the faculty of math and physics-- the shame game so to speak. And that experience of spinning every one of Baez hate spews, spinning back to his fellow faculty members, that I can only imagine his fellows got sick and tired of Baez that they drove some sense into the fools head. That chapter with getting rid of Baez, lay the blueprint of how I would get rid of other hate mongers. The worst being Kibo, for he is far far to insane to be "shamed by colleagues".

So I needed to bide my time for a big Kibo flopper mistake. And that big mistake came recently in 2022 when I sent condolences to the late beloved Queen of England, Elizabeth 2nd. I posted my condolences to my newsgroup plutonium atom universe and can be seen there. I posted my condolences in sci.math and within minutes the Kibo gang of haters forged what I had said into a necrophilia quip. Zelos Malum started the hate spew, and was told he was fired from his job in Sweden because of it. Kibo posted that I had made the necrophilia comments as well as Chris Thomasson in London.

I always maintain that stalkers are insane and so it is not long before they trip up and tripp all over themselves. So now I had the weapon of "shame game" to urge those around Kibo and his gang members that Kibo and his gang be banned altogether from sci.math and sci.physics. They add no math to sci.math nor physics to sci.physics. They only pester, harrass and demonize others.

But it is not the necrophilia forgery that I will use to rid Kibo-- or whoever calls into the hate net that Kibo set up-- posting under Volney, and Moroney before.

For I had learned in the getting rid of John Baez hate stalker that the greatest single mistake of Kibo, was his constant insertion of The Pope. Kibo not only defiles and demonizes AP for 30 years, but in the last 10 years has defiled The Pope. And it is this defiling that will get Kibo banned from sci.math and sci.physics.

Insane people are dumb people and they quickly make the mistake that gets them removed.

John Sylvester, I do not know how much of the above are facts-- CIA connection, NSF connection paid to hate spam, Gay connection. All of these are clues, but after being demonized for 30 years, it is understandable I never really care what Kibo is or was or anything else about him. My goal here is to get him completely out of my life, as a insane creep that he is with his open channel of hatred. Kibo is in my "final spin mill" where everyone of his hate posts of the future will simply be bounced back to a audience of grown ups who will (like John Baez) walk him or carry him to a psychiatric clinic.

On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:34:04 PM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> -What are your thoughts on other frequent sci.math/physics figures? I am aware of John Gabriel and his new calculus, Dan Christensen with DC proof, and Amine Moulay Ramdane who posts a lot of philosophy and poems, among others.
>

Some wise person in the late 1990s in sci.math said that Usenet is "self policing" and at the time I was not really cognizant of his wisdom, when so many were trying to get into a moderated newsgroup. But decades later I realized the wisdom of that insight.

That for total personal freedom to post in a newsgroup, that others of that newsgroup offer the best policing. And in turn a moderated newsgroup is inferior to a total freedom newsgroup, provided there is self policing.

I can just imagine AP trying to post his ideas-- Atom Totality-- the real electron of atoms is the Muon not the 0.5MeV particle-- that calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. I can just imagine being refused to post most of my ideas all because a moderator is "in the way".. But then the flip side, the unmoderated group has all those ideas and much much spam.

So the unmoderated newsgroup is actually the Superior newsgroup, provided some of its subscribers take on a policing role when not doing science.

As it stands, sci.math and sci.physics are the crown jewels of all of Usenet because they have the Atom Totality theory, they have the world's first proofs of valid Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the worlds discovery that true electron of atoms is Muon, for sci.math and sci.physics has that great discoveries, not any moderated newsgroup, and not any research journal or science magazine. In the future, historians will pick through sci.physics and sci.math because it is here that all those great discoveries were announced and advanced and refined.

But in that glory, comes the price of policing the newsgroup. And John Gabriel is on topic with math in sci.math, but many of his ideas are simply wrong. I never cared whether Gabriel was wrong as long as it was math, on topic. But then came a time that John Gabriel was actually stealing some math from what AP had discovered and John not able to footnote or cite reference. I do this by "quoting" others. John could never understand he was stealing ideas and not citing sources, and that caused me to start policing him as best I could, without wasting too much of my own time.

If you cannot cite original source of your ideas and are stealing those ideas, it is encumbent on others in a unmoderated newsgroup to police the miscreant. Same thing can be said of Arindam Banerjee in sci.physics who continues to steal the ideas of others and never gives them credit. If John Gabriel had never stolen ideas from AP, I would never have replied to any of his posts.

Dan Christensen is a bully and airhead of logic. So dumb is he that I laugh to this very day of his failure in the most simple of logic.

Here is an example of Dan Christensen fumbling with the most simple of logic reasoning, and yet Canada keeps allowing this misfit to dig deeper into logic.

The stupid Dan Christensen always chokes up when it comes to logic or even just plain commonsense with his 2 OR 1 = 3 and his AND as subtraction.

On Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 10:08:09 AM UTC-6, Peter Percival wrote:
> Dan Christensen wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 9:47:32 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 8:27:19 AM UTC-6, Dan Christensen wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 9:16:52 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >>>> PAGE58, 8-3, True Geometry / correcting axioms, 1by1 tool, angles of logarithmic spiral, conic sections unified regular polyhedra, Leaf-Triangle, Unit Basis Vector
> >>>>
> >>>> The axioms that are in need of fixing is the axiom that between any two points lies a third new point.
> >>>
> >>> The should be "between and any two DISTINCT points."
> >>>
> >>
> >> What a monsterous fool you are
> >>
> >
> > OMG. You are serious. Stupid and proud of it.
>
> And yet Mr Plutonium is right. Two points are distinct (else they would
> be one) and it is not necessary to say so.
>

And no-one can penetrate that worthless thick skull of Dan that Boole & Jevons screwed up logic with their connectors of OR versus AND. For in Boole & Jevons logic it is 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, because they mixed up AND truth table as TFFF when in reality it is TTTF. So Dan does not deserve to post in sci.math with his b.s. pollution and should be self-policed out of sci.math.

Amine Moulay Ramdane was doing offtopic posts-- poems and other stuff, not mathematics. And Amine departed graciously, after many had said "where is the math". So Amine departed graciously. If only Dan Christensen or John Gabriel had the graciousness of Amine, then sci.math would be that much better..

Sci.math and sci.physics have to be self policing since they are totally free and open. And as I said earlier, the total free and open newsgroup is far far superior to the moderated newsgroup.

AP

On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 7:53:21 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
> 4:31 PM (3 hours ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to Plutonium Atom Universe
>
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 1:56 PM (2 hours ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
> Hi, a lot of questions here, John, and will answer all of them, but not all at once. Each question deserves some lengthy time response. So will answer them all, but over time.
>
> On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:34:04 PM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 7:04:52 PM UTC+1, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 8:36:38 AM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> > > > To Archimedes Plutonium,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to have a conversation with you, if you don't mind, and ask you questions about your scientific theories. If you would be willing to, please contact me in this thread.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > J. S.
> > > Hi, John, thanks for the question. I am here in sci.physics every day of the year, a free and open channel is sci.physics. So fire away on any question. And if stalkers and hate mongers invade the thread, well, just ignore them.
> > >
> > > Impossible to turn sci.physics, sci.math back to its pristine days of August 1993, but still, these two newsgroups are top communication of science, far better than any science book, science magazine, science research report. For the very best of all in science is now communicated over a Free & Open channel.
> > >
> > > Fire away....
> > >
> > > AP
> > Thanks for your response, AP.
> >
> > I would like to ask you the following questions about sci.math and sci.physics, or Usenet in general. There are quite a few, please only answer those which you are comfortable with, in as much or little detail as you wish.. Whatever insights you can give me are much appreciated.
> >
> I am comfortable with all questions, provided they are serious and sincere.
> > -You seem to have been here for a very long time, you mention August 1993 - you're perhaps the longest continuous user of these forums. You talk about the pristine days and I've seen you speak about how nowadays they have devolved into a lot of spam. Do you know the reason why sci.math/sci.physics etc. devolved into spam, and/or can you pinpoint a rough date around which this occured?
> >
> Yes, I wrote a book on this question of yours. For when I came to Usenet in 1993, there was a sea change about 1996, where it seemed as though dot edu addresses by posters with real true names and the colleges and universities they were posting from seemed to abruptly stop. Few edu addresses, after 1996 and by early 2000, only a handful of posters with dot edu addresses, and most posters with fake names.
>
> I lived through Usenet from August 1993 to present, almost every day.
>
> And what I attribute the decline of dot edu address and real true names is the incursion of police, FBI, CIA drag net spam. Not the stalkers and stupid spammers on topic. But from drag net spam by government and police. My book gives details of this spam. And now today, anyone can look at the bombed out husk of a shell of sci.chem newsgroup. Not long before you reach posters like FBInCIAnNSA...... posters to tell you that there is no chemistry in sci.chem.
>
> My 129th published book
> Short History of Usenet, sci.physics, sci.math from 1993-2020, and its 90% decline// Sociology series, book 9
>
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
>
>
> Last revision was 6Jan2022. This is AP's 129th published book on science.
>
> Preface: This book started out as a book on "stalking" but when Google revised its Google Newsgroup platform, with altogether different formatting, this book morphed into becoming a "90% demise of Usenet and sci.physics and sci.math in particular". In one of my posts on this book I said the title was going to change often until I actually write the book. And that is what happened. For in late December 2021, It was revealed to me that a persistent stalker under the name Michael Moroney (who stated in one of his stalking posts to be kibo, as in Kibo Parry) was posting from a CIA line in 1997. So that completes this history of Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics, as the demise is nearly all due to the fact that the constant and persistent police drag net spam chased most everyone else away, and most importantly the dot-edu address posters out of sci.math and sci.physics. Educated people just do not want to bother discussing physics or math while everywhere around is criss-crossed with vulgar police drag net spam.
>
> Cover Picture: Is the newsgroup Plutonium-Atom-Universe that is fully controlled by the King of Science AP, Archimedes Plutonium. Every post in that newsgroup is about pure science, no ad hominem. And that is what the sci.physics and sci.math should be. Discussions on pure science, nothing else, and especially no ad hominem, no stalking, no spam, no off-topic junk, no solution manual selling, no drug selling, no police drag-net spam.
>
> Product details
> • Publication Date : August 31, 2020
> • ASIN : B08H5B71M4
> • File Size : 1045 KB
> • Word Wise : Not Enabled
> • Print Length : 78 pages
> • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> • Language: : English
> • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Lending : Enabled
> 
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 2:37 PM (2 hours ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
>
> JS> > -If you had to sum up the essentials of what the Plutonium Atom Totality is to someone, how would you do it? It seems to be a theory of yours that you are incredibly passionate about?
> > >
>
> Do you know the history of Paul Dirac, the exquisite physicist of 1900s? Paul was only a few of physicists who had logical intelligence along with physics intelligence. It is so so difficult to ever find a physicist who is good in logic along with good in physics.
>
> Anyway, the story goes, if you know it, and all physicists should know Dirac's story. Is that Dirac sometime around 1930 had a sensation that the Magnetic Monopole must exist, for his logical mind said that if it did not exist, the symmetry of Physics and all of science is wacko-- out of line. The Maxwell Equations of Dirac's 1930s is anti-symmetrical and all of physics is anti-symmetrical. So, logic was driving Dirac. And you can read this in his Directions in Physics, 1975.
>
> Few physicists, few scientists have logical intelligence to compliment their understanding of science. Anyway, Dirac looked and looked and looked and never found his Magnetic Monopole. But, it was all around him. It is the 0.5MeV particle, for J.J. Thomson in 1897 and then Rutherford and Bohr and all who came after made a huge mistake. They all thought, including Dirac, that the Thomson 0.5MeV particle was the electron of Atoms. No. They made a mistake. What Thomson discovered in 1897 was the Dirac magnetic monopole.
>
> The true electron of atoms was discovered in the 1930s and it was named the Muon. But unknown to the physics community, that the muon was the true electron of Atoms.
>
> So the story about Dirac, is he knew that the Magnetic Monopole must exist, because otherwise all of science has No-Symmetry, is ill-logical. It was the Logic driving Dirac.
>
> Same thing goes for the greatest science theory of all time-- The Atomic theory by Ancient Greeks. One of them even espoused the Cosmic Atom, but of course, well, there was no Periodic Table of Chemical Elements back in Ancient Greek times.
>
> So now, let me weave in Dirac and his magnetic monopole and AP with a Cosmic Atom, a single atom that is the entire Universe itself.
>
> Is the logic of the world such that All is Atom, except for the Universe itself?? Or should the Logic be All is Atom and include the cosmos?
>
> If the Universe is not a single atom, then we have to alter the Atomic Theory to make that exception. But, if the Universe itself is a single atom, one of the 118 elements of Chemistry. Then the Atomic Theory is 100% LOGICAL, with no exceptions.
>
> I wrote many books on Atom Totality, and recently wrote my 231st book of science on this very subject of weaving Logic with Physics. No-one is a master at physics, if they lack a logical mind in doing physics. Dirac was a master in physics, as well as Feynmann. You do not have to go far in Feynman's Lectures on Physics to find that Feynman revered the Atomic Theory as the greatest single piece of science-- in fact page 1-2, volume 1, you find Feynman's reverance of the Atomic theory.
>
> Summary:: The Atom Totality theory is logical, whereas anything else-- Big Bang, etc is illogical.
>
> My 231st published book
>
> All Things are made up of Atoms. The Universe is a Thing. Therefore the Universe is one single Atom of 231Plutonium // Logic
>
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
>
> Last revision was May 2023. And this is AP's 231st published book of science.
>
> Preface: The last time I worked on this idea was 2017, when I wrote it in my 8th edition of Atom Totality. And when I wrote it there, I was wanting to switch out the term "things" for a more scientific term such as "matter".. For I was not comfortable with All things are made up of Atoms-- The Universe is a thing, therefore the Universe is an Atom. The upshot of switching "things" for "matter" made it better, but never eased my discomfort. I still felt there was room for improvement in the syllogism. Here on, 6 years later, I have finally found what makes me totally comfortable about the syllogism I have in 2023. It is not the switching of terms, but rather the inclusion of both quantifiers into the syllogism. Inclusion of the "Every or All" Universal quantifier along with the Existential quantifier that solves the logic. It ends up with "All Existence..." And the case can be made in life in general-- if stumped by a problem, best lay it aside and let the mind in subconscious find the best answer. I know in projects around the house, if I jump into them immediately I often have to "undo" that work. But if I rest and sleep on the problem for 3 weeks, I find the best way to tackle the work. In this case, I rested on the problem for 6 years, and now reaping the rewards.
>
> When you combine All Existence.... or Everything that Exists.... combine that with All Matter is only one single atom of 1 of 118 possible chemical elements, then you end up with the Universe itself is one single atom of 1 of 118 single possible chemical elements. Plutonium atom fits all the special numbers of physics and math.
>
> This book is about the Logic form of the Atomic Theory as a syllogism. And I dare say, my book would be a nice companion book to Titus Lucretius, poet and scientist with his magnificent De Rerum Natura poem on the Atomic Theory. If not for Lucretius, much of our history knowledge of the Ancient Greek Atomic Theory would have been lost and unknown.
>
> A Logic Syllogism can be seen to some extent as verses of a poem, Titus Lucretius lovely poem to the Atomic Theory. And for which AP believes the calendar of the world was set as year 0000 as Lucretius writes the poem in year 0000, and now we are 2,023 years later from the poem on Atomic Theory.
>
> Cover Picture: The cover picture is my iphone photograph of a old book of 1931, so old that the pages have "yellowed". It is the only book in which I have proof that the idea the entire Universe is one big atom, is stated. It is by a chemist who has excellent writing skills and writes of the history of the Atomic Theory. I took the photograph of page 4-- A SHORT HISTORY OF ATOMISM
> by J. Gregory, Univ. Leeds, 1931, page 4-- and capturing the passage where Gregory talks of the Democritean Atom the size of the entire Universe. The only difference really between Democritus Atomic Theory in Ancient Greek times almost 3,000 years ago, and AP in 2023, is that if Democritus knew the chemical table of elements, he would be looking for what element is the Atom Totality.
>
>
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BY778BJK
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 11, 2023
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 944 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 44 pages
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 3:21 PM (1 hour ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
>
> JS> > -What is your motivation for posting for so long? You seem very passionate about science, having posted thousands of times to Usenet. I'm curious as to what it is you wish to accomplish.
> >>
>
> AP writes: Well, if you read into the Atom Totality theory, it is not long before you come upon a concept crucial to that theory. Called Superdeterminism. John Bell the Irish engineer played a key role in quantum mechanics with his Bell Inequality, and the solution that John came up with is -- Superdeterminism. A world where no free-will exists and all is fated. We now a days recognize this as quantum entanglement, and NOVA recently did a show on this concept.
>
> It is not by chance or circumstance or luck that the Internet Usenet came about in early 1990s, but was fated and slated to be up and running and that the Atom Totality theory would use Usenet as a command platform to spread new true science. It is not by happenstance that I continue to use sci.math and sci.physics but my destined fate to use them as a communications platform. I seek not to accomplish anything, but that to fulfill my role destined by fate-- King of Science.
>
> Feynman, the last king used colleges and book writing. Maxwell used his editorship at Encyc Britannica. AP uses Usenet sci.physics and sci.math.
>
> My top priorities in using Usenet and King of Science-- avert Atomic War. Get a human permanent colony on Europa for our Sun has gone Red Giant Phase and all of life on Earth is doomed to extinction and oblivion if we do not colonize Europa in time. Both of these require a communications platform like Usenet to get the message out.
>
> I am working on Reincarnation science, and hope to make great advances and strides into that science.
>
> If I am lucky, I shall have written 500 books on science before I die. At the moment I am up to 241st book, almost halfway there.
>

> If I am lucky, I shall have written 500 books on science before I die. At the moment I am up to 241st book, almost halfway there.
>

I certainly cannot be making contradictions. Superdeterminism erases all luck, all chance. So let me correctly phrase that statement.

If I am fated to what I wish, I shall have written 500 books on science before I die.

On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:34:04 PM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> -Are you aware of the song entitled "Archimedes Plutonium" by "Ramona Falls"? I spoke to the musician who created it, and have confirmed they named it after you. Here is a link to it on SoundCloud. Also, what do you think of it?
>

Yes I am well aware of that music group and their song Archimedes Plutonium.. In fact I bought it and listening to it now, as I write this.

I met this group at Dartmouth College New Hampshire where the Atom Totality theory was borne in 1990. And I had become sort of a celebrity on campus.

In the year in which Dolly the Sheep, the world's first animal clone had been performed. I was contacted by this talented group of musicians. Asking me if they could do a documentary on me. For one of their classes had assigned them to do a documentary of something. They chose to do me. And so I was explaining to them the theory.

And if I remember correctly the length of the documentary was 3 minutes long, and all the class would air their documentary in the theater at a specific date.

I was totally unaware that these young men were musicians, exceptionally talented musicians. Totally unaware for I requested that they especially play the music of Quiet Streams-- There is a Balm in Gilead. If I had known they were musicians, I would not have made that demanding request. But perhaps what they had come up with was this song "Archimedes Plutonium". And saved it for later times. And I bet that their documentary is still archived at Dartmouth College. Wish you all the luck in the world-- Ramona Falls.

Lyrics of Archimedes Plutonium

What I'd give if you'd feel my love
Take my hat off, take off your gloves
You'll never know
You already know
I can't help it, I can't sit still
Let me sneak in your window sill
Finally we combine our forces
Freedom is power to change the choices
Finally we combine our forces
Freedom is power to change the choices
Archimedes Plutonium
All you've worked for and all you've won
You'll never know
You'll never know
What I'd give if you'd feel my love
What I'd give if you'd feel my love
Finally we combine our forces
Freedom is power to shape the choices

And I attended that documentary theater program and saw my documentary in movie with the There is a Balm in Gilead.

I was fortunate to run into this musical group for many years thereafter-- the Ramona Falls band and singer Brent Knopf, would almost totally occupy any Google Search of AP as being the 9 hits out of the first 10 hits of a Google search of AP, drowned out all the corrosive hate spew that my enemies tried to fill my search hit list with.

What I especially like about this music band is their focus and concentration of science themes in their music, one of the reasons I loved Vangelis so much is the science references.

And I have used the Ramona Falls song in several of my Science Fiction books. And hopefully both will become movies, with those songs included in the movie.

My 78th published book

Archimedes Plutonium// sci-fi series, book 3
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Last revision was 22May2021. This is AP's 78th published book.

This story is _based upon a true history story of the person named Archimedes Plutonium_, and most of it is true history, however, since it has several slices of science fiction within the story, means it is overall a beautiful science fiction.

Cover Picture is a collage of pictures starting with a Rock-Elm forest then a photo of AP with his father Willis, and then a photo of AP shortly after the discovery of the Plutonium Atom Totality theory.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B083D8WP1M
Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 31, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 832 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
Print length ‏ : ‎ 85 pages
Best Sellers Rank: #330,850 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#71 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
#870 in Two-Hour Science Fiction & Fantasy Short Reads
#2,638 in Two-Hour Literature & Fiction Short Reads

My 147th published book

Our Sun Gone Red Giant and Americium saves Humanity // sci-fi series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 14Aug2022. And this is AP's 147th published book of science.

This movie needs to be made for several reasons. And I want to remark to future readers, that I lived in a time where the majority of people on Earth considered Space travel as dumb and wasteful when so much other problems existed on Earth. And they considered time and money spent on Space travel was money that was thrown away. This was the major attitude of all people on Earth from 1950 to 2022, that money spent for Space was throwing it away, like going to the Moon or Mars or elsewhere. But once the word is out to the world, in 2017, that stars shine from Faraday law, not fusion, means Space travel becomes critical endeavor, if life in the Solar System wants to live in the future. For it was reported by NASA that the Sun had a yearly increase in radiation of 0.005% yearly increase from 2010 to 2020, which is huge. And caused 25% of all insects on Earth to perish from this radiation increase. And of course there were Mega-droughts. So this movie will bring to attention the entire planet Earth of what faces life on Earth.

Preface: In August of 2020, AP discovered that the Sun has gone Red Giant Initiation Phase, having killed 25% of all insects in the past decade. This is what happens when stars are powered by Faraday Law and not that mistaken idea of fusion power. This means that either humanity evacuates Earth completely and makes Europa, and the Jovian satellites and Saturn satellites their new home, or humanity perishes, vanishes into oblivion as the Sun destroys Earth and makes Earth be another Venus and where the Sun finally engulfs Earth. Ironic, would it not be, that the spacecraft Voyager 1, maybe the only remnant that there ever was a species called humanity, left, remaining in existence after the next 1 million years. In light of that discovery, AP writes the sequel book 5, of where Captain Pu of book 4 returns to save Earth. Captain Pu however has a new name, a new person, is fortunately reincarnated by the Gods of Heaven, and has a new name, Americium, Captain Am.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RW1RG1V
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 31, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 946 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 90 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science

On Friday, May 26, 2023 at 3:05:58 AM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

[snip]

> Dan Christensen ...

[snip]

From his antics here at sci.math, it is obvious that AP has abandoned all hope of being recognized as a credible personality. He is a malicious internet troll who now wants only to mislead and confuse students. He may not be all there, but his fake math and science can only be meant to promote failure in schools. One can only guess at his motives. Is it revenge for his endless string of personal failures in life? Who knows?

In AP's OWN WORDS here that, over the years, he has NEVER renounced or withdrawn:

"Negative numbers are the witches and hobgoblins of insane kook mathematicians. "
--Dec. 7, 2022

“Primes do not exist, because the set they were borne from has no division.”
--June 29, 2020

“The last and largest finite number is 10^604.”
--June 3, 2015

“0 appears to be the last and largest finite number”
--June 9, 2015

“0/0 must be equal to 1.”
-- June 9, 2015

“0 is an infinite irrational number.”
--June 28, 2015

“No negative numbers exist.”
--December 22, 2018

“Rationals are not numbers.”
--May 18, 2019

According to AP's “chess board math,” an equilateral triangle is a right-triangle.
--December 11, 2019

Which could explain...

“The value of sin(45 degrees) = 1.” (Actually 0.707)
--May 31, 2019

AP deliberately and repeatedly presented the truth table for OR as the truth table for AND:

“New Logic
AND
T & T = T
T & F = T
F & T = T
F & F = F”
--November 9, 2019

AP seeks aid of Russian agents to promote failure in schools:

"Please--Asking for help from Russia-- russian robots-- to create a new, true mathematics [sic]. What I like for the robots to do, is list every day, about 4 Colleges ( of the West) math dept, and ask why that math department is teaching false and fake math, and if unable to change to the correct true math, well, simply fire that math department until they can find professors who recognize truth in math from fakery...."
--November 9, 2017

And if that wasn't weird enough...

“The totality, everything that there is [the universe], is only 1 atom of plutonium [Pu]. There is nothing outside or beyond this one atom of plutonium.”
--April 4, 1994

“The Universe itself is one gigantic big atom.”
--November 14, 2019

AP's sinister Atom God Cult of Failure???

“Since God-Pu is marching on.
Glory! Glory! Atom Plutonium!
Its truth is marching on.
It has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
It is sifting out the hearts of people before its judgment seat;
Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer it; be jubilant, my feet!
Our God-Pu is marching on.”
--December 15, 2018 (Note: Pu is the atomic symbol for plutonium)

Updated version (repetition removed):

"Oh Atom Plutonium, as great as you are
How great thou are, are, are, are.
Oh Atom Plutonium, the God that you are
How beautiful is your world of science
Your science is the world
How beautiful is your world of science
Your science is the world
Oh Atom Plutonium, Great God of Atoms
Atom of Atoms
Oh Atom Plutonium, as great as thou art"
--March 24, 2023

Dan

Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

On Thursday, May 25, 2023 at 1:34:04 PM UTC-5, John Sylvester wrote:
> -Is there anything else you would like to mention, for someone who would be interested in getting to know what you or your work is about?
>
> Thank you very much for being open about this. I look forward to your response.

Yes, I have a personal newsgroup of

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe  
Archimedes Plutonium

And most of my work is now published in Amazon's Kindle, presently at 241 published books of science. At one time in my life I was a High School teacher. So the objective of publishing books is to replace all textbooks of science that are not based on "Logical Reasoning". Thus I have a entire series of textbooks for Physics and for Mathematics and for Logic. I wish to publish 500 books of science before I die, and almost halfway there.

I would like Google to engineer a new feature into Google Newsgroups of sci..math and sci.physics, at least those two newsgroups, and whether they leave all the other newsgroups "as is" makes no difference. But to engineer a option when posting a new thread. The option the author can have replies, or not have any replies. This would automatically bounce any stalker with their endless and mindless hate spew. And some have remarked that it would thus leave spammers like Jim McGinn in sci.physics or Arindam Banerjee in sci.physics or John Gabriel in sci.math or Socratis in sci.math, leave them posting anti-science without someone so to speak "saving newcomer High School students". And I would contend that students are smart enough to know when they are reading some "flake of science". But, these flakes can be handled without invading "their thread". They can be handled much in the same way I handle WM and Socratis and McGinn by a independent thread naming them.

Sci.math and sci.physics need to be totally free to all, even spammers, and these two newsgroups must be "self-policing", but they need that option for a author to post a sequence series of thoughts without a daily barrage of insane demonizing stalkers. I want to publish science books and want a thread of thoughts without being interrupted by insane nutjobs. And if some people dislike what I present or offer, they can make their own independent thread which attacks my thread, but does not interrupt me constantly. This is what is happening to Socratis, to WM, to McGinn, to Gabriel, to Dan Christensen. Let them post their anti-science in their thread, and use your own independent thread to complain of their anti-science. For often the case such as WM anti-science, you enter their thread 1 minute ago and 2 minutes later another groupie of WM has replied, burying your post under a pathetic mass of 900 posts.

Google, give authors of origin of a thread to have a "no reply" thread versus a reply thread.

AP