AP's 174th book// Mathopedia-- Listing of 70 fakes and mistakes of Old Math..

Last revision was 28JUN2021.

Preface: I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds question of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).

Some of these can be found in AP's TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS series, but the entries keep changing and added on new, means I need to have a separate book for these fakes, mistakes and errors of Old Math.

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for ages 18-19 Freshperson College, math textbook series, book 3
Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
Listing the Errors of Old Math, list of 1 to 50.

Alright, well, mathematics is a closed subject. What I mean by that is due to the textbook series of Archimedes Plutonium TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, that once you learn the polynomial transform and learn the two Power Rules of Calculus, you reached the peak, the pinnacle of all of mathematics, and anything further in math is just details of what you learn in that textbook series. Math is a completed science because it has this "peak of calculus", unlike the other 5 hard sciences of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy. Those other five will continue to find new ideas, new things, while math remains static and complete to its peak of calculus understanding. Mathematics is finished complete as far as a science goes because the peak of math is going nowhere. And even though Physics will find new science such as how the proton toruses inside of atoms are configured in geometry, the geometry and calculus used in that configuration, that new science does not change nor does it create or require a new math peak/summit to handle the new physics.

Now I do need to discuss the Errors of Math in General and the errors of math in geometry in particular. I have the feeling that Geometry is the more important of the two-- algebra - geometry. This list appears in most of AP's Teaching True Mathematics textbook series by Archimedes Plutonium, meant to be a guide and orientation, and a organizing of what must be covered before graduating from College, and what math to steer clear of.

Errors mostly, but not always, for some are included because too much time spent on them.

The listings in Mathopedia of errors, mistakes and fakes is based on the idea that Calculus is the supreme achievement of all of mathematics for it is the essential math of doing Physics electricity and magnetism. And in order to have a proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, we must clean up and clean out all the mistakes, fakes and errors of Old Math, erst, we have no Calculus. So calculus is the consistency maker for the rest of all of mathematics.

1) Calculus requires a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, a proof that derivative and integral are inverses of one another, just as addition and subtraction are inverses, or, multiplication and division are inverses. The only way to obtain a geometry proof is to clean up and clean out all the fakes, mistakes and errors of Old Math, such as their fake numbers-- the Reals. Their fake definition of function allowing anything be a function. Their fakery of a continuum when even physics by 1900 with Planck onwards in Quantum Mechanics proving the Universe is discrete Space not a continuum, yet by 1900 onwards those in mathematics following the idiotic continuum in the Continuum Hypothesis with even more avid interest, when they should have thrown the continuum on a trashpile of shame.

2) The true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers, because you have to need and apply one mechanism only to obtain the true numbers of mathematics-- Mathematical Induction. In Old Math they had just a tiny few intelligent mathematicians, Kronecker, who emerged from the gaggle crowd of kooks to notice that Naturals all come from one single mechanism-- Mathematical Induction. But Old Math never had a crowd of mathematicians with logical brains to say-- all our numbers need to come from the one mechanism of Mathematical Induction.

3) The true numbers of math have empty space between successor and predecessor numbers. For example the 10 Grid is 0, .1, .2, .3, . . . , 9.8, 9.9, 10..0. Where no numbers exist between .1 and .2, etc. Only discrete numbers allow us to give a proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

4) All functions of mathematics must be a polynomial, and if not a polynomial, convert the offering to a polynomial over a specific interval.

5) Space is discrete and all lines in space are strings of attached straight lines.

6) No curves exist in Geometry, only finer and smaller straight line segments attached to one another.
We can still keep the name "curve" as long as we know it is a string of fine tiny straightline segments strung together in what looks like a smooth curve. If curves exist, then the Calculus in Fundamental Theorem of Calculus cannot be proven and thus Calculus does not exist. We all know that we have to have Calculus, and so we throw out onto the trash pile the curve of Old Math. And this is reasonable because starting in 1900 in physics there arose the Quantum Mechanics of Space being discrete. And a discrete space has no continuum, has no curve of Old Math.

7) Space has gaps in between one point and the next point. These gaps are empty space from one point to the next point, for example in 10 Grid there is no number between .1 and .2, and in 100 Grid there exists no number between .01 and .02.

8) Limit analysis was an insane fakery in Old Math, concocted because Old Math needed the excuse of some proof, so they invented the monster con-artist trick that a limit analysis would divert the fact it is no proof at all, but a Non Sequitur argument. Limit analysis is juju totem witchcraft dance around a desire to prove the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Just as idiotic as dancing around a sick person of a virus is going to cure the person.

9) Infinity has a borderline and there is a microinfinity compared to a macroinfinity. For example in 10 Grid, the microinfinity is .1 if we exclude 0 and so there is no number smaller than .1 and no number larger than 10 in 10 Grid, where 10 is macroinfinity.

10) The 1st Quadrant Only in Coordinate System Geometry. Sad that the first coordinate system of Descartes was correct but soon became corrupted with 4 quadrants. See Mathematical Thought, Volume 1, Kline, 1972, page 303. Where Fermat then Descartes starts the Cartesian Coordinate System as 1 axis only and from 0 rightwards, meaning in our modern day math, 1st Quadrant Only. Why did math screw up on coordinate systems? I suppose some clowns thought negative numbers were true and they wanted ease of drawing a circle with center at 0. When they could have just as easily drawn the circle in 1st Quadrant Only.

11) Calculus needed a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Old Math never provided such, instead they provided some stupid Limit argument. The reason for the creation of the Limit disaster was that the French mathematician Cauchy got sick and tired of hearing his smartest students complain that the width of rectangles in the integral are 0 width, and those smart students could not, for the life of them understand how a rectangle with 0 width has any interior area. So instead of the math community denouncing the limit, instead they elevated the fakery.

12) Further in Calculus, they knew you could do a transform of coordinate points to turn any function into a polynomial function, a method of Lagrange.. However, they in Old Math were too stupid to take this transform to its highest form-- all functions are polynomial functions and only polynomial functions. When you learn that-- the derivative and integral of any and every function of math is a snap breeze simple and easy.

13) With the error filled 4 quadrants, when it should be 1st Quadrant Only, we have Trigonometry's sine and cosine with the fakery of sinusoid wave when it never was that. The sine and cosine are semicircle waves, and no sinusoid wave exists.

14) There is only one Geometry-- Euclidean, and there is not three distinct geometries of elliptical Riemannian or hyperbolic Lobachevsky. Those two are just duals that make up Euclidean.

15) Torus, volume and surface area formulas in Old Math are all screwed up and in error because they imagined bending a cylinder to form a torus. This brings back memories, for I had to do a percentage formula, since I could not follow the fake way of bending a cylinder. Where 78.5% of Disc Torus (pi)R^2h - (pi)r^2h is the volume of Circle Torus, and 78.5% of Disc Torus 2(pi)Rh + 2(pi)rh + 2 ((pi)R^2 - (pi)r^2) is the surface area of Circle Torus..

16) Ellipse is never a single cone slant cut, always a cylinder slant cut. Although you do get an ellipse from double cones of this configuration <> which in Old Math was the hyperbola, but two hyperbolas joined together to form a ellipse.

17) All Parallelepipeds reduced to a Rectangular Box by making 2 cuts and pastes. Volume of the original Parallelepiped is simply a*b*c of the Rectangular Box length*width*depth formed. Old Math never understood that a precise definition of Parallelepiped has two kinds, the parallelepiped that has 90 degree angles and the parallelepiped that has no 90 degree angle.

🤮 of Math and 💩 of Physics Archimedes "Splatter-Fart-Shitee" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:

> AP's 174th book// Mathopedia-- Listing of 70 fakes and mistakes of
> Old Math.
>
1) Ludwig Poehlmann
2) Ludwig Hansen
3) Ludwig van Ludvig
4) Ludwig Plutonium
5) Archimedes Plutonium
6) Archimedes Plutonium
....
70) Archimedes Plutonium

Governor Noem this is one example of Kibo Parry (Moroney-Volney) 30 year hate stalking of AP
On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 1:29:06 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🤮 of Math and 💩 of Physics Archimedes "Splatter-Fart-Shitee" Plutonium

Re:Kibo >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, 7:41:27 AM

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 4:40:18 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> I want to fuck her corpse

Kibo's>I want to fuck her corpse>Elizabeth Kam,Esther A. Wertz,Kristin Bennett,Heidi Jo Newberg
On Sunday, April 30, 2023 at 12:09:52 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> I want to fuck her corpse

The never ending stalker and character defiler, paid to stalk Kibo Parry aka Moroney-Volney.
Why Kibo, because no-one at Rensselaer can admit slant cut of cone is Oval not ellipse. Or because no-one at Rensselaer can ask the question, which is the Atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle??
It is for sure that no-one at Rensselaer Polytech can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- all they can do is the phony limit-analysis of 0 width rectangles, as if analyzing something constitutes a proof of math.

Re:Kibo >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, 7:41:27 AM
>
> Volney
>
> 7
>
> unread,

> > Rensselaer's Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt,Donald Schwendeman
> > Kibo on howling crazy fuckdogs
> > On Thursday, April 27, 2023 at 6:07:13 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> > >"antiscience"
> > >"howling crazy fuckdog"
> >
> > Kibo Parry aka Moroney aka Volney the paid for 30 year stalker.
> >
> > Why Kibo? Because they cannot ask the simple physics question???
> >
> > NSF Dr.Panchanathan, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff 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) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
> > 2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
> > 3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
> > 4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
> >
> > 5) 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.
> > 6) 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
> > 7) 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"
> > 8) 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)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #2-6, 177th published book
> > > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Architecture of Atoms, 3rd year College
> > > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle Edition
> > > >
> > > > Preface: I come to teaching physics for 3rd year College as the Architecture of Atoms. My writing style will be prose-narrative, until I add on exercise problems and convert it into a textbook. The 1st year College, has to be the equations and laws of electricity and magnetism. For the primal-axiom over all of physics is-- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. The 2nd year College is thermodynamics. And now the 3rd year College physics has to teach the Architecture, the geometry of the inside and exterior surface of the atom. One of the greatest faults, misery, and anti-science teaching of Old Physics is their denial that subatomic particles have to be something more than tiny balls tiny spheres that do-nothing, perform nothing, function as nothing. That the proton and neutron and true electron=muon, has to be matter with a function and purpose and design and task and job. This is a year of physics teaching of the architecture of the atom.
> > > > Cover Picture: A iphone photograph of my book chemistry book, a long time favorite of mine of CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, Waser, Trueblood, Knobler, 1980, and page 307 of that book. Why this page? Because it was instrumental in my discovery of the true Architecture of Atoms. Not many professors of chemistry or physics dive into the Shrodinger Equation that results in a meaningful teaching of "matter waves". Matter waves are the heart of understanding the geometry of Atomic Architecture.
> > > >
> > > > Product details
> > > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09VFH9QST
> > > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 12, 2022
> > > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 823 KB
> > > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 74 pages
> > > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > #2-7, 178th published book
> > > >
> > > > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Architecture of Light Waves & Energy, 4th year College
> > > > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Kindle edition)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Preface: This is 4th year College Physics and the important ideas of physics to learn as last year undergraduate school is the architecture and geometry of the Light Wave & Energy in physics. This is New Physics and not Old Physics. New Physics is defined as physics that knows and uses the true electron of atoms is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus and doing the Faraday law, creating new electrical energy that is storaged in the neutrons of atoms until they grow from 1eV into 945MeV and then create a new higher atomic numbered atom or emitted as radioactivity. Old Physics mistakenly identified the electron of atoms as the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. In 3rd year College we studied the architecture of the interior of atoms. In 4th year College we study the architecture of Light Waves & Energy.
> > > >
> > > > The template book for 4th year College is Feynman's 1985 book of QED.
> > > >
> > > > Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of the template book for this book. Feynman's 1985 QED, quantum electrodynamics, showing my plastic toy model of DNA and my cut-outs of 4 bent circles that each bent circle represents one magnetic monopole. I arranged the monopoles into a single strand of a cycloid wave.
> > > >
> > > > Product details
> > > > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09W58XGDW
> > > > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 21, 2022
> > > > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > > > • File size ‏ : ‎ 824 KB
> > > > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > > > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > > > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 66 pages
> > > > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> > Rensselaer math department
> > Donald Schwendeman, Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, William Henshaw, Isom Herron, Mark H Holmes, David Isaacson, Elizabeth Kam, Ashwani Kapila, Maya Kiehl, Gregor Kovacic, Peter Kramer, Gina Kucinski, Rongjie Lai, Fengyan Li, Chjan Lim, Yuri V Lvov, Harry McLaughlin, John E. Mitchell, Bruce Piper, David A Schmidt, Daniel Stevenson, Yangyang Xu, Bulent Yener, Donald Drew, William Siegmann
> > On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 12:36:39 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> > > Wood louse of Math and Bathynomus giganteus of Physics
> > > 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
> > > >
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 12:07:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > > > I want to fuck her corpse
> > > On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 2:26:54 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> > > > Wood louse of Math and Bathynomus giganteus of Physics
> > > > tarded:
> > >