Kibo Parry Moroney on the fact that Dr. Hanlon of Dartmouth could never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, only the mind-rot limit analysis that failed mathematicians mete-out. I personally do not think that even Dr. Hanlon is aware of his mindless limit analysis in calculus is asking students to believe a 0 width rectangle in the integral somehow has interior area, for, well of course Philip has --no logical brain. Kibo, did you ask Philip if he even tried doing the cone experiment, fold a paper into a cone-- (takes me all but 5 minutes from start to finish) drop down a Kerr lid and give it a slant and see for yourself it is not a ellipse but a Oval, or is Philip such a failure at math that he is scooted into being the president of Dartmouth to give him a chance of what Kibo Parry Moroney calls failure at that. But no, that is probably too much thinking for a President of Dartmouth College.

On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 8:15:26 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>Stooge"
> fails at math and science:
>"irrelevant"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

#8-1, 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.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray: Not Enabled
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

#8-2, 11th published book

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

Last revision was 4Apr2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
Preface:
Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had (1) a ill-defined infinity; (2) they had the fakery of Limit concept; and (3) they had the fakery of a continuum; and (4) perhaps most important of all as long as Old Math had the wrong numbers that compose mathematics that no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus was ever possible. Sad that starting 1900, Planck showed that Space is discrete in physics, not continuous, leading to the rise of Quantum Mechanics. But the fools of mathematics went the opposite direction in wanting ever more a continuum in mathematics. They spent the entire 20th century riding high on Cohen's depraved continuum. You could almost say that starting 1900, the people in mathematics compared to those in physics would become more and more ignorant and further estranged, and that a widening schism rift separated math from physics, from the realities of the actual world as the future decades and centuries rolled by. And who knows where this rift would leave math as a science decreasing in vim and vigor. Will it end in math becoming a third or fourth tier science, ranking it above say economics but far below even psychology, because much of math proof is kook psychology acceptance divorced of reality. In this view, physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, even geology ranked far higher in power and wisdom than math.

By the 19th and 20th and 21st centuries, the single number one important topic and subject in all of mathematics was Calculus, and the reason being, is that Physics is mostly calculus, the science of motion and change. And everyone in math knows that calculus is geometry. So, then, to not have a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is a failure and failing of being a mathematician.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

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

---------------------------
Table of Contents
---------------------------

1) Preliminary mathematics needed to do the Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

2) How the dumb limit concept was borne, that is a con-artist job.

3) When you know the true numbers of mathematics, Decimal Grid Numbers, you need no limit concept.

4) Mathematics has two houses, one is numbers, one is geometry.

5) All numbers come from physics because the Universe is just one big atom of 231Pu.

6) History of my discovery of Decimal Grid Numbers.

7) The error of having a proper Coordinate System to do the Calculus as 1st Quadrant Only with all positive Decimal Grid Numbers.

8) Concept of Infinity versus Finite for Calculus.

9) Brief proofs of the Infinity borderline, especially Huygens tractrix.

10) World's first picture diagram proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus by 2015.

11) Calculus the very most important math to date.

12) Everyone in mathematics knows that Calculus is geometry.

Length: 39 pages

Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1236 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 39 pages
Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#134 in Calculus (Books)
#20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)

#8-3, 24th published book

World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.

Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.
Length: 61 pages

File Size: 1241 KB
Print Length: 61 pages
Publication Date: March 20, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07NMV8NQQ
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 

#8-4, 28th published book

World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.

1- Kibo Parry Moroney on the fact that Dr. Hanlon of Dartmouth could never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, only the mind-rot limit analysis that failed mathematicians mete-out. I personally do not think that even Dr. Hanlon is aware of his mindless limit analysis in calculus is asking students to believe a 0 width rectangle in the integral somehow has interior area, for, well of course Philip has --no logical brain. Kibo, did you ask Philip if he even tried doing the cone experiment, fold a paper into a cone-- (takes me all but 5 minutes from start to finish) drop down a Kerr lid and give it a slant and see for yourself it is not a ellipse but a Oval, or is Philip such a failure at math that he is scooted into being the president of Dartmouth to give him a chance of what Kibo Parry Moroney calls failure at that. But no, that is probably too much thinking for a President of Dartmouth College.

On Saturday, May 15, 2021 at 12:28:44 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> fails at math and science:
>
>
> On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 8:15:26 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >Stooge"
> > fails at math and science:
> >"irrelevant"
> >flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
>
> #8-1, 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.
>
> Length: 21 pages
>
> File Size: 1620 KB
> Print Length: 21 pages
> Publication Date: March 11, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled
> X-Ray: Not Enabled
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
> #8-2, 11th published book
>
> World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 4Apr2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
> Preface:
> Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had (1) a ill-defined infinity; (2) they had the fakery of Limit concept; and (3) they had the fakery of a continuum; and (4) perhaps most important of all as long as Old Math had the wrong numbers that compose mathematics that no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus was ever possible. Sad that starting 1900, Planck showed that Space is discrete in physics, not continuous, leading to the rise of Quantum Mechanics. But the fools of mathematics went the opposite direction in wanting ever more a continuum in mathematics. They spent the entire 20th century riding high on Cohen's depraved continuum. You could almost say that starting 1900, the people in mathematics compared to those in physics would become more and more ignorant and further estranged, and that a widening schism rift separated math from physics, from the realities of the actual world as the future decades and centuries rolled by. And who knows where this rift would leave math as a science decreasing in vim and vigor. Will it end in math becoming a third or fourth tier science, ranking it above say economics but far below even psychology, because much of math proof is kook psychology acceptance divorced of reality. In this view, physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, even geology ranked far higher in power and wisdom than math.
>
> By the 19th and 20th and 21st centuries, the single number one important topic and subject in all of mathematics was Calculus, and the reason being, is that Physics is mostly calculus, the science of motion and change. And everyone in math knows that calculus is geometry. So, then, to not have a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is a failure and failing of being a mathematician.
>
> The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.
>
> Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.
>
> Cover Picture: Is my hand written, one page geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the world's first geometry proof of FTC, 2013-2015, by AP.
>
> ---------------------------
> Table of Contents
> ---------------------------
>
> 1) Preliminary mathematics needed to do the Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
>
> 2) How the dumb limit concept was borne, that is a con-artist job.
>
> 3) When you know the true numbers of mathematics, Decimal Grid Numbers, you need no limit concept.
>
> 4) Mathematics has two houses, one is numbers, one is geometry.
>
> 5) All numbers come from physics because the Universe is just one big atom of 231Pu.
>
> 6) History of my discovery of Decimal Grid Numbers.
>
> 7) The error of having a proper Coordinate System to do the Calculus as 1st Quadrant Only with all positive Decimal Grid Numbers.
>
> 8) Concept of Infinity versus Finite for Calculus.
>
> 9) Brief proofs of the Infinity borderline, especially Huygens tractrix.
>
> 10) World's first picture diagram proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus by 2015.
>
> 11) Calculus the very most important math to date.
>
> 12) Everyone in mathematics knows that Calculus is geometry.
>
> Length: 39 pages
>
> Product details
> ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
> Publication date : March 14, 2019
> Language : English
> File size : 1236 KB
> Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> Screen Reader : Supported
> Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> X-Ray : Not Enabled
> Word Wise : Not Enabled
> Print length : 39 pages
> Lending : Enabled
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> #134 in Calculus (Books)
> #20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
>
>
>
>
>
> #8-3, 24th published book
>
> World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.
>
> Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.
> Length: 61 pages
>
> File Size: 1241 KB
> Print Length: 61 pages
> Publication Date: March 20, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07NMV8NQQ
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> #8-4, 28th published book
>
> World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
> Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.
>
> Cover picture: Shows four countries colored yellow, red, green, purple and all four are mutually adjacent. And where the Purple colored country is landlocked, so that if it were considered that a 5th color is needed, that 5th color should be purple, hence, 4 colors are sufficient.
> Length: 29 pages
>
> File Size: 1183 KB
> Print Length: 29 pages
> Publication Date: March 23, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PZ2Y5RV
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> #8-5, 6th published book
>
> World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 // Math proof series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 29Apr2021. This is AP's 6th published book.
>
> Preface:
> Real proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof.
>
> Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019, I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.
>
> Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.
>
> As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).
> Length: 156 pages
>
>
>
>
>
> File Size: 1503 KB
> Print Length: 156 pages
> Publication Date: March 12, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PQKGW4M
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> #8-6, 19th published book
>
> World's First Proof of Collatz Conjecture// Math proof series, book 6 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
>
> Old Math's Collatz conjecture, 1937, was this: If you land on an even number, you divide by 2 until you come to an odd number. If you come to or land on an odd number, you do a 3N+1 then proceed further. The conjecture then says that no matter what number you start with, it ends up being 1.
>
> What the Collatz proof of math tells us, is that so very often mathematicians pose a conjecture in which their initial formulation of the conjecture is murky, obfuscation and poorly designed statement. Such poorly designed statements can never be proven true or false. An example that comes to mind of another poorly designed conjecture is the No Odd Perfect Conjecture, in which the statement is obfuscation of factors. So for the odd number 9, is it 1+3, or is it 1+ 3 + 3. So when a mathematics conjecture is full of obfuscation and error in the statement, then these type of conjectures never have a proof. And takes a person with a logical mind to fix and straighten out the conjecture statement and then provide a proof, thereof.
>
> Cover picture: when I think of Collatz, I think of a slide, a slide down and so my French curve is the best slide I can think of, other than a slide-ruler, but a slide ruler is slide across.
>
> Length: 27 pages
>
>
> Product details
> File Size: 1926 KB
> Print Length: 27 pages
> Publication Date: March 16, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PS98K5H
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #172,756 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #8 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> #7 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
> #58 in Number Theory (Books)
>
> #8-7, 20th published book
> World's First Proofs that No Perfect Cuboid Exists// Math proof series, book 7 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Someone on the Internet posed the unproven No Perfect Cuboid, and so I took up the challenge. I am usually a sucker for geometry riddles, more so than number theory. So I obliged. Then by 2014 I proved the matter and looking back at it now in 2019, I really really do not see what all the fuss was about-- that it was not that hard not hard at all. You just have to look carefully at sets of 4 right triangles and find an Impossibility Construction, why you cannot have those 4 right triangles all with positive integer numbers for their 3 sides. But the proof method is so hugely important in math-- impossibility of construction. And, please, do not confuse that method with Reductio Ad Absurdum, for RAA is not a valid proof method in mathematics (see my logic book on RAA). But, the method of Impossible Construction, although it might look like RAA, is totally different and fully valid in all aspects.
>
> But now, in hindsight in March 2019, writing this up, I see a very close connection of No Perfect Cuboid to that of Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem with its equation of A^x + B^y = C^z and the way I proved Generalized FLT was with "condensed rectangles" and the No Perfect Cuboid is a 3rd Dimension object but it is 4 rectangles of 4 right triangles we inspect. And we can pursue that connection between Generalized FLT and No Perfect Cuboid further, but not now.
>
> Cover Picture: Is that of 4 rectangular boxes, 2 of which are cubes sitting atop a book page of the Cubic Set for the Transuranium Atoms, from the textbook "The Elements Beyond Uranium" , Seaborg, Loveland, 1990. I am always looking for connections.
> Length: 58 pages
>
>
>
>
>
> File Size: 1382 KB
> Print Length: 58 pages
> Publication Date: March 16, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PMZQNNT
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> #8-8, 21st published book
>
> World's First Proofs of Mathematics Oldest Unsolved Problems: No Odd Perfect and Finiteness of Perfect Numbers // Math proof series, book 8 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 26Apr2021. And this is AP's 21st published book.
>
> Preface: Now my history with these proofs goes back to 1991 to 1993, and have been finessing the proofs ever since. Some math proofs just nag nag and nag you. They just cannot be settled still. Their proof is a tiny tiny sliver of impossibility that is easily overlooked. Like an optical illusion that you are mislead into, or like those pictures where you look at it one way and you see a young lady and another way you see a very old lady.
>
> Now the No Odd Perfect Number is not a important proof in mathematics but mostly a spectacle for it does not teach much beyond making proper correct definitions. And murky definitions is what held a proof of No Odd Perfect, other than 1, held it back. The murky definition of factors, do we include 1 or not include, for example the odd number 9, do we include 3 twice or once for that we have 1* 9 and we have 3*3 and Old Math looked at that as 1 + 3, whereas I would look at that as 1 + 3 + 3. So when you have messy definitions, murky and messy, of course no proof will be found in over 2,000 years.
>
> Cover Picture: Shows our modern day new reality of the situation where the definition of "perfect" was a Ancient Greek idea, steeped in murky messy idea of factors and when to add factors, that no longer is suitable for mathematics.
>
> Length: 28 pages
>
> File Size: 1534 KB
> Print Length: 28 pages
> Publication Date: March 16, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PN1CPRP
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> #8-9, 15th published book
>
> World's First Proofs of Infinitude of Twin-Primes, and Polignac Proved // Math proof series, book 9 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Circa 1991-1993, I gave an Old Math style of proof for the Infinitude of Twin Primes, modeling my proof as to a Euclid Infinitude of Primes Proof. But then came year 2009 when I found the way to make Infinity concept well-defined. Up until 2009, no-one in the world had a clear precise definition or understanding of what "infinity" was or what it means. It means a borderline between finite and infinite and the way to find this borderline is to use the Tractrix when the unit-tractrix area catches up with the area inside a unit circle is the infinity borderline and it happens to be when pi digits have three zeroes in a row, does the tractrix area equal the circle area-- hence, we reached infinity border and beyond are infinite numbers, no longer finite numbers. What that discovery does for proofs of infinitude is change all those proofs dramatically. And here in Twin-Primes and Polignac I show the reader how modern day New Math proves infinitude of any set of numbers.
>
>
> Cover Picture: Is a picture of the first five twin-primes.
> Length: 10 pages
>
>
> File Size: 1641 KB
> Print Length: 10 pages
> Publication Date: March 15, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PMY1YWB
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> #8-10, 16th published book
>
> World's First Proofs of Goldbach, Legendre, Staircase Conjectures// Math proof series, book 10 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> AP proved the Goldbach Conjecture starting 1993 where the Algebra Columns is the bedrock-key of the proof involved. The Algebra Column Array is the tool and no-one was going to prove Goldbach unless they had that tool, which the 2014 post of mine makes the array tool crystal clear. So starting 1993, I posted to sci.math about Array or Algebra Column which as a tool would render all proofs of this nature. The Goldbach conjecture historically dates back to 1742, and the Legendre conjecture dates 1752-1833. The Staircase conjecture is a wholly new conjecture proposed by AP circa 2016.
>
> Cover: Is a Algebra Column Array sequence starting with 6 Array and then 8 Array.
> Length: 37 pages
>
>
> File Size: 1740 KB
> Print Length: 37 pages
> Publication Date: March 15, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PS6MR48
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #148,852 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #4 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
> #38 in Number Theory (Books)
> #7 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
>
>
> #8-11, 25th published book
>
> Disproof of Riemann Hypothesis // Math proof series, book 11 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> The Riemann Hypothesis was a conjecture never able to be proven and for good reason, for it was the last symptom of a rampant disease inside of mathematics. Old Math did not have the true numbers that compose mathematics. Old Math had a rag-tag ugly collection of fake numbers with their Reals being Negative numbers compounded with Rationals compounded with Irrationals and then adding on the Imaginary. These are fake numbers, when the true numbers of mathematics are the Grid Numbers. Because Old Math uses fake numbers, is the reason that Riemann Hypothesis just languished, languished and languished. Below I demonstrate why having fake numbers in math, creates fake proofs, fake theorems, and creates a conjecture that can never be proven.
>
> Cover picture: Riemann Hypothesis deals with what are the true numbers, something we are supposed to learn when just toddlers, wood counting blocks. All the true numbers of mathematics come from Mathematical Induction-- counting.
> Length: 31 pages
>
>
>
>
>
> File Size: 1455 KB
> Print Length: 31 pages
> Publication Date: March 20, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PVDS1RC
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
> X-Ray: Not Enabled 
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported 
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
> I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers..
> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> Archimedes Plutonium