novaBBS - sci.math - 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, where none can do a valid, let alone geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, on the first page of a search for them.

3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, where none can do a valid, let alone geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, on the first page of a search for them.

170,003 views since I took a shower.
by
Robert's profile photo
Robert wrote:
May 25, 2021, 2:05:20 PM

And I think Robert is a aficionado on providing Google Search hits on 1st page of Rose M Patten in Toronto Univ and Linda Hasenfratz at Western Ontario Univ to fix the ugly cesspool mess of corrupt math and logic departments at their respective Universities, for James Leech is doing a marvellous job of either firing the corrupt mathematics and logic professors, and then they would only fill up Toronto and Western with more corrupt math and logic.

Can you believe it-- Canadian logicians actually believe in 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction. Such dumb idiocy in Old Canada would have gotten a student whipped by a ruler across his hands, but not the professors who cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and teach mind-rot of 2 OR 1 = 3.

As Robert precisely emphasises and entices us in, on the fact that too many modern day puffed up con-artists of mathematics run around chasing fame and fortune but never any math truth and reality. They are very very poor teachers of the subject as seen by most students veer away from taking math, when in fact, math can be, yes, can be the easiest subject of the Sciences as seen by Harold Jacobs book Mathematics a Human Endeavor, or Archimedes Plutonium TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS.

But few if any mathematicians want to make math simple easy and fun. No, instead they go the opposite way to make math a reaping of fame and fortune on their ill gotten gains by making math obfuscation, obtuse, obnoxious and abhorrent, and ugly in classrooms.

And Google needs to address the "fame and fortune seeking math professor" that destroys the subject of mathematics for they perpetuate nonsense such as a "limit analysis proof" on the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, yet these con-artists of Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, John Baez, Chandler Davis, Jill Pipher, Ken Ribet, all know that Calculus is geometry. Yet ask anyone of them, ask them, where is their geometry proof of FTC, and not a mindless non sequitur that is a limit analysis.

Too busy chasing after fame and fortune Dr. Wiles ? Too busy chasing after fame and fortune Dr. Tao?

Thank you Google, thank you for having Balanced Reported Google Search hits of Dan Christensen for on his 1st page of Google hits the 7th entry on 1st page reads:

Re: Canada's Dan Christensen of Univ Western Ontario flunked the Math Test of...
>Can you provide a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus? If not, well, you flunked mathematics.
>Dan Christensen flunked the Math Test of a...

Thank you Google, and please, please put such a Balanced Reporting hit on 1st page of Terence Tao, of Andrew Wiles, of Thomas Hales, of John Stillwell, of John Baez, of Jill Pipher, of Ken Ribet, of Chandler Davis, because, Google, their hits are nothing but skewed propaganda where in the case of Tao, every other paragraph is peppered with "oh, oh, he is such a genius" when the true facts is that Terence Tao is a math failure who runs a torture chamber on youngster students math education for the imp Terence Tao still teaches a ellipse is a slant cut in single cone when the truth is the oval is that slant cut never the ellipse, and still teaches the error filled Boole logic of AND truth table being TFFF when in reality it is TTTF, because Tao's teaching of such logic leads to 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, but worst, worst of all Dr. Tao knows Calculus is geometry, yet the imp can never do a geometry proof of FTC.

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 19May2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
Preface:
Actually my title is too modest, for the proof that lies within this book makes it the World's First Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for in my modesty, I just wanted to emphasis that calculus was geometry and needed a geometry proof. Not being modest, there has never been a valid proof of FTC until AP's 2015 proof. This also implies that only a geometry proof of FTC constitutes a valid proof of FTC.

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had a huge mass of mistakes, errors, fakes and con-artist trickery such as the "limit analysis". To give a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus requires math be cleaned-up and cleaned-out of most of math's mistakes and errors. So in a sense, a Geometry FTC proof is a exercise in Consistency of all of Mathematics. In order to prove a FTC geometry proof, requires throwing out the error filled mess of Old Math. Can the Reals be the true numbers of mathematics if the Reals cannot deliver a Geometry proof of FTC? Can the functions that are not polynomial functions allow us to give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a Coordinate System in 2D have 4 quadrants and still give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a equation of mathematics with a number that is _not a positive decimal Grid Number_ all alone on the right side of the equation, at all times, allow us to give a Geometry proof of the FTC?

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

Length: 137 pages

Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1307 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 137 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)

5th published book

Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 29Mar2021. This is AP's 5th published book of science.
Preface:
First comes Logic-- think straight and clear which many logic and math professors are deaf dumb and blind to, and simply refuse to recognize and fix their errors.

The single biggest error of Old Logic of Boole and Jevons was their "AND" and "OR" connectors. They got them mixed up and turned around. For their logic ends up being that of 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = either 3 or 2 but never 5, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 (addition) with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 (subtraction). The AND connector in Logic stems from the idea, the mechanism involved, that given a series of statements, if just one of those many statements has a true truth value, then the entire string of statements is overall true, and thus AND truth table is truly TTTF and never TFFF. And secondly, their error of the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a probability end conclusion.

My corrections of Old Logic have a history that dates before 1993, sometime around 1991, I realized the Euclid proof of infinitude of primes was illogical, sadly sadly wrong, in that the newly formed number by "multiply the lot and add 1" was necessarily a new prime in the indirect proof method. So that my history of fixing Old Logic starts in 1991, but comes to a synthesis of correcting all four of the connectors of Equal/not, And, Or, If->Then, by 2015.

Cover picture: some may complain my covers are less in quality, but I have a good reason for those covers-- I would like covers of math or logic to show the teacher's own handwriting as if he were back in the classroom writing on the blackboard or an overhead projector.

Click here to read the complete article

On 5/26/2021 12:57 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, where none can do a valid, let alone geometry proof

Repost it 19,430 more times you retarded mouthload of Nazi goat rectums.

On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 3:57:48 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, where none can do a valid, let alone geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, on the first page of a search for them.
>

I guess you will also want the Flat Earth Society at the top of page 1 for "geography," eh, Archie Poo?? What a loser.

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

AP is a malicious internet troll who wants only to mislead and confuse you. 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.

Note that AP will often delete his bizarre and hateful postings when his lies are called out, only to repost identical ones moments later in a NEW thread.

Readers should, of course, judge for themselves. In AP's OWN WORDS here:

“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.”
--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]"
--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)

Dan

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

170,003 views since I took a shower.
by
Robert's profile photo
Robert wrote:
May 25, 2021, 2:05:20 PM

Too busy chasing after fame and fortune Dr. Wiles ? Too busy chasing after fame and fortune Dr. Tao?

Thank you Google, thank you for having Balanced Reported Google Search hits of Dan Christensen for on his 1st page of Google hits the 7th entry on 1st page reads:

3rd published book

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

Length: 21 pages

#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)

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.

Length: 137 pages

5th published book

Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Click here to read the complete article

The four lunatics of reddit/math, Terry Tao, Scott Contini, Sam Maksimovich, Mr. Pezevenk, none can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, too stupid to even know what that is.

Now is Mr. Pezevenk the fourth lunatic, missing out on his fair share of lunaticing, for I do remember now that there were 4 Stooges although the TV show said 3 Stooges.

ScottContini reddit/math
King of Science, Archimedes Plutonium meets lunatics Terry Tao in 1994 and Scott Contini 2021, with tap dancing Mr. Pezevenk talking about Riemann hypothesis as a lavatory.
Reddit Sam Maksimovich, 3 weeks ago from 22May,2021

Question Scott and Sam, why has Terry Tao the failure of mathematics never able to give you a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. AP has done one in 2015, and is Reddit 6 years behind the times, behind in science. Do they call you the 3 Lunatics of Reddit??

The three lunatics of reddit/math, Terry Tao, Scott Contini, Sam Maksimovich, none can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, too stupid to even know what that is.

11th published book

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

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.

Length: 137 pages

Kibo Parry Moroney on--tarded, shit for brains// Terence Tao, Andrew Wiles, Thomas Hales so dumb and stupid in math that none of them can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

On Saturday, May 22, 2021 at 6:43:36 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
> Stooge"
> fails at math and science:
On Thursday, May 20, 2021 at 7:21:29 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"Drag Queen of Science"
> tarded:
> That's why you are a shit for brains
>You can't tell the
> difference between an electron and Dirac's monopole, or an electron from
> a muon. It should be easy, since the magnetic monopole
>
> You need to learn the difference between reality and your flashback
> hallucinations. Also during your hippie days, didn't anyone ever tell
> you not to lick the LSD tabs with "Goofy" on them? Bad trips, man!

On Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 3:33:30 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> Poor, demented

Dan, this is probably a nice test for Kibo Parry Moroney but don't you think Andrew Wiles, Jill Pipher, Thomas Hales are beyond this?
On Monday, March 12, 2018 at 10:37:45 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > Use any aids. Answer in the space provided.
> >
> > 1. What is the sine of 45 degrees to 3 decimal places? ____________
> >
> > 2. True or false: 10^604 = 0 ____________
> >
> > 3. If A is true and B is false, then A AND B is ____________ (true or false).
> >
> > 4. If A is true and B is true, then A OR B is ____________ (true or false).
> >

11th published book

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

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.

Length: 137 pages

Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1307 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 137 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)

AP writes: it is not as if a geometry proof of calculus is difficult and hard, no. And everyone in math knows Calculus is geometry. The trouble is most everyone in math has no logical brains to be doing math such as Tao, Wiles and Hales who run around looking for fame and fortune by foisting their latest con-artist nonsense, foist that into the public domain to reap more fame and fortune when those three imps and nitwits of math cannot even do a geometry proof of calculus. So retched dumb are these three in mathematics that they have no time to even entertain the idea that Fundamental theorem of Calculus requires a geometry proof. No, instead these three imps of math con artist their "limit analysis".

> Re: 135,566 Student victims Queen's Univ. James Leech, Arthur B. McDonald by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- his mindless electron =0.5MeV when real electron o
> #2-1, 137th published book Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series,
> May 10, 2021
> by
> Michael Moroney
>
>
> by Michael Moroney
> Re: TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS series by Archimedes Plutonium, only math books to teach correct calculus with a geometry proof of Fundamental theorem of Calculus. Old Math cannot even fix its mistake of ellipse is a cylinder section, never a conic.
>
> by Michael Moroney
> Re: 5-AP's 150th book// TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Freshperson College// Physics textbook series, book 4 by Archimedes Plutonium// Using as template Halliday& Resnick & AP's Senior year High School to AP's 150th book// TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//
>
>
> by Michael Moroney
> Re: Zelos asks why Harvard's Dr. Hau wants to fail in physics, by not turning off the light to see if light wave is a closed loop pencil ellipse that AP predicts. Is Dr.Hau stubborn and too ignorant to finish her experiment??
>
> Re: Drs. Sigurdur Helgason, Anette Hosoi, David Jerison of MIT are you as dumb as Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = monopole
> By Michael Moroney 14 posts 94 views updated 10:57 PM
>
> Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
> By Michael Moroney 49 posts 519 views updated 2:19 AM
>
> Re: Racist-math at Reed College-- ellipse is never a conic, David Perkinson, Lyudmila Korobenko, John Lind, Dylan McNamee, Kyle Ormsby, Angelica Osorno
> By Michael Moroney 55 posts 419 views updated 2:18 AM
>
>
>
> Re: Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech never does correct Logic, why an unpaid Archimedes Plutonium is doing their work
> By Michael Moroney 24 posts 176 views updated 2:17 AM
>
>
> Re: Erik sickfuck Eastside says>oil & vinegar// UCLA Physics with their imbecile electron--Gene D. Block,Ernest Abers,Elihu Abrahams, too stupid to understand Real Proton = 840 MeV with electron= muon and .5MeV was Dirac magnetic monopole
> By Michael Moroney 39 posts 288 views updated 2:16 AM
>
> Re: 8Der_FartMouth Births-comics for Eric FartFrancis, with snickering by George FartWitte published by ST FARTMARTINS
> By Michael Moroney 32 posts 430 views updated 2:15 AM
>
>
> Re: If Marissa Mayer were still at Google-- probably take her 15 minutes to engineer a better newsgroup
> By Michael Moroney 28 posts 188 views updated 2:14 AM
>
>
> Re: 6Der_FartMouth Births-comics for Eric FartFrancis, with snickering by George FartWitte published by ST FARTMARTINS
> By Michael Moroney 29 posts 307 views updated 2:13 AM
>
>
>
>
> Re: 6Der_FartMouth Births-comics for Eric FartFrancis, with snickering by George FartWitte published by ST FARTMARTINS
> By Michael Moroney 28 posts 292 views updated 12:31 PM
>
>
> Re: L. Reif, Marty Walsh, Charlie Baker, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins-- Moroney-- Boston's antiscience stalker fool//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
> By Michael Moroney 19 posts 120 views updated 12:28 PM
>
>
>
> Re: If Marissa Mayer were still at Google-- probably take her 15 minutes to engineer a better newsgroup
> By Michael Moroney 20 posts 156 views updated 12:26 PM
>
>
> Re: 8Der_FartMouth Births-comics for Eric FartFrancis, with snickering by George FartWitte published by ST FARTMARTINS
> By Michael Moroney 29 posts 422 views updated 12:25 PM
>
>
> Re: Erik sickfuck Eastside says>oil & vinegar// UCLA Physics with their imbecile electron--Gene D. Block,Ernest Abers,Elihu Abrahams, too stupid to understand Real Proton = 840 MeV with electron= muon and .5MeV was Dirac magnetic monopole
> By Michael Moroney 34 posts 244 views updated 12:23 PM
>
>
> Re: Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech never does correct Logic, why an unpaid Archimedes Plutonium is doing their work
> By Michael Moroney 20 posts 165 views updated 12:22 PM
>
>
> Re: Racist-math at Reed College-- ellipse is never a conic, David Perkinson, Lyudmila Korobenko, John Lind, Dylan McNamee, Kyle Ormsby, Angelica Osorno
> By Michael Moroney 50 posts 405 views updated 12:21 PM
>
>
> Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole (1)
> By Michael Moroney 44 posts 461 views updated 12:17 PM
>
>
> Re: Steven Weinberg flunked physics lifelong-generation test
> 2/8/18
> By Michael Moroney 37 posts 427 views updated 2:04 PM
>
> On Thursday, May 20, 2021 at 10:52:43 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >Stooge"
> > tarded:
>
> Kibo Parry Moroney has been a 28 year nonstop stalker. Probably paid more to stalk than college professors paid to actually teach physics in classrooms.
>
> On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> > Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
> Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> > of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
>
>
> Re: Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, CalTech never does correct Logic, why an unpaid Archimedes Plutonium is doing their work
> by
> Michael Moroney
>
> Oct 28, 2017, 11:55:50 PM
>
> 
> Cornell a sicko school? Re: Cornell Univ like Christensen, an education parasite //with their 3 OR 2= 5 while their 3 AND 2 = 1, embracing the contradiction Either..Or..Or..Both
> by
> Michael Moroney
> Jan 18, 2019, 4:59:49 PM
>
> Re: Drs.Benedict Gross, Joseph Harris of Harvard, are you as dumb as Moroney never realizing the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV,monopole=.5MeV // 12 proofs below
> by
> Michael Moroney
> Jan 2, 2018, 11:15:07 AM
>
>
>
> Re: Drs.Hugh Woodin,Horng-Tzer Yau of Harvard, never a Picture of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus//are you as dumb as Moroney//your students deserve better
> by
> Michael Moroney
>
> Dec 29, 2017, 9:04:44 AM
>
>
>
> Re: the most stupid poster of logic in sci.math for decade-- Dan Christensen, that insane Canadian stalker
> by
> Michael Moroney
> Dec 24, 2017, 1:15:41 AM
>
>
> Re: chemistry cannot exist with electron .5 to 938 MeV Re: Drs.Thomas Rosenbaum John Schwarz Kip Thorne of CalTech/never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac monopole
> by
> Michael Moroney
> Jan 25, 2018, 11:36:09 AM
>
>
>
>
>
> Re: Jeff Relf, Seattle offtopic shithead spammer says Democrats value tortured South Korean Moon Bears at trillions of dollars, while Republicans rather have rats than Moon Bears
> By
> Michael Moroney May 10, 2021
>
>
>
> Re: South Korea frees Moon Bears, due to Ayaz apology. Glory to God Almighty, South Korea finally freeing their tortured Moon Bears
> I happened to see a video of a moon bear that was freed from a bile farm (in Vietnam). Nice to see,
> By Michael Moroney May 9, 2021, 9:48 PM
>
>
>
> Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
> 1/23/18
> By Michael Moroney
>
>
> Moroney says autism // Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins//never realizing Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
> 3/4/18
> By Michael Moroney
>
>
>
> Re: unpaid AP doing the world's finest logic, while Cambridge, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton teach dunce Logic
> 10/28/17
> By Michael Moroney
>
>
> Re: MIT's Dr.Martin Bazant, Harvard's Dr.Dennis Gaitsgory-- time you take your full responsibilities as science educator and deal with science failures Michael Moroney
> 8 posts by 2 authors
> 12/4/17
> By Michael Moroney
>
>
>
> Drs.L. Reif, Victor Kac, Irwin Pless of MIT, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
> 20 posts by 3 authors
> By Michael Moroney
>
>
>
>
> Re: 8Der_FartMouth Births-comics for Eric FartFrancis, with snickering by George FartWitte published by ST FARTMARTINS
> 20 posts by 2 authors
> 4/9/18
> By Michael Moroney

Click here to read the complete article

Kibo Parry M. on 🤡 Andrew Wiles, and Terence Tao 🤯 of Math
On Sunday, May 16, 2021 at 11:54:00 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🐁 of Math and 🐀 of Physics
>"failure"
On Saturday, June 19, 2021 at 1:50:59 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Village Idiot of
> fails at math and science:

AP writes: Kibo Parry Moroney pressing hard on Google Search hits to be fair and balanced with a COUNTERPOINT on first page of search list for Andrew Wiles and Terence Tao, for it is silly propaganda that Google search lists are with 5 million sugar coated baby boy genius of Tao and 5 million hits of Andrew Wiles trophy cabinet when the two are failures and losers of math with never a geometry proof of fundamental theorem of calculus. So idiotic was Wiles and Tao, they still believe and teach 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction.

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

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.

Length: 137 pages

Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Length: 72 pages

File Size: 773 KB
Print Length: 72 pages
Publication Date: March 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PMB69F5
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
 

#6-2, 27th published book

Correcting Reductio Ad Absurdum// Teaching True Logic series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 9NOV2020. This is AP's 27th published book.

Preface:
These are the TRUE Truth Tables of the 4 connectors of Logic

Equal+Not
T = T = T
T = ~F = T
F = ~T = T
F = F = T

If--> then
T --> T = T
T --> F = F
F --> T = U (unknown or uncertain)
F --> F = U (unknown or uncertain)

And
T & T = T
T & F = T
F & T = T
F & F = F

Or
T or T = F
T or F = T
F or T = T
F or F = F

Those can be analyzed as being Equal+Not is multiplication. If-->then is division. And is addition and Or is subtraction in mathematics. Now I need to emphasis this error of Old Logic, the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a probability unknown, undefined end conclusion.

Now in Old Logic they had for Reductio Ad Absurdum as displayed by this schematic:

| | ~p
| |---
| | .
| | .
| | q
| | .
| | .
| | ~q
| p

Which is fine except for the error of not indicating the end conclusion of "p" is only a probability of being true, not guaranteed as true. And this is the huge huge error that mathematicians have fallen victim of. For the Reductio Ad Absurdum is not a proof method for mathematics, it is probability of being true or false. Math works on guaranteed truth, not probability. This textbook is written to fix that error.
Length: 86 pages

Product details
• ASIN : B07Q18GQ7S
• Publication date : March 23, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1178 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 86 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #346,875 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #28 in Logic (Kindle Store)
◦ #95 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #217 in Mathematical Logic
•

Click here to read the complete article

Google does a fair, accurate, honest with Counterpoint Search list on Harvard Univ Dr. Hau where she refuses to finish her slow light experiment only because it will prove that AP was correct-- light waves are closed loop circuits back to the source of the light. But, a Google Search of Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales reveals only 5 million hits or more that is pure propaganda, sugar coated propaganda to elevate con-artist failures of math with their con-artist trickery, when neither Wiles, Tao, Hales can even do a valid proof or geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. So, apparently, Google is aiding and abetting con artist fakery in math, where they figured out how to skew in favor of con-artists, carnival barkers.

Google, -- no-one would ever know that Tao, Wiles and Hales are failures of math that cannot even do a valid nor a geometry proof of Calculus, (not their numbskull limit analysis). Never know they are not geniuses but rather lousy con-artists seeking fame and fortune but never the truth of mathematics. Not when Google gives them 5 million hits all saying the same thing-- oh the baby boy genius.

11th published book

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

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.

Length: 137 pages

What if PBS Newshour only did interviews with Republicans, never Democrats, is what Google search of Wiles, Tao, Hales is all about.

Here in the 5th and 6th Google Search list of Harvard's Dr. Hau is a counterpoint, and Fair, Honest, Balanced Search hits.

Lene V. Hau | DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS - Harvard Physics
Lene Vestergaard Hau is the Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics and of Applied Physics and is also on the faculty of the Harvard Biophysics Program. Prior to joining ...
Hau Lab at Harvard
harvard dr hau from www.seas.harvard.edu

Lene Hau - Wikipedia
harvard dr hau from en.m.wikipedia.org
Lene Vestergaard Hau is a Danish physicist who is currently the Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics and of Applied ...
Academic career
Qubit transfer
Cold atoms and...
Awards
Publications

Harvard University - Prof. Lene Hau: Stopping light cold - YouTube

2:27

Thanks Google for Balanced Search Hits on Harvard's Dr. Hau-- unfinished and ...
May 28, 2021 — ... experiment on Slow Light. Why is she so stubborn as to not completing her experiment?? Image Web results Hau Lab at Harvard harvard dr hau.
Harvard's Dr. Hau drag queen of science according to 28 year ...

🤡Kibo Parry M. on 🤡Wiles, 🤡Tao, 🤡Hales with their never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, far too stupid to realize Calculus is geometry and that a "limit analysis" is fakery and so they failed mathematics by not even trying to prove Fundamental Theorem of Calculus geometrically.

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

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.

Length: 137 pages

On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 2:12:07 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics

Google we need this thread in a first page Google Search of Tao, Wiles, Hales as Counterpoint rather than the propaganda brainwash of 5 million hits all saying the same-- the baby boy genius, when in actuality they failed math.

Same goes for a Counterpoint on first page of physicists Steven Weinberg, Sheldon Glashow and Peter Higgs, so dumb in physics they cannot even ask the question which is the true electron of atoms, the muon or the 0.5MeV particle.

A balanced fair Google Search hit list with Counterpoint on first page.

HISTORY OF THE PROTON MASS and the 945 MeV //Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

In 2016-2017, AP discovered that the real proton has a mass of 840 MeV, not 938. The real electron was actually the muon and the muon stays inside the proton that forms a proton torus of 8 rings and with the muon as bar magnet is a Faraday Law producing magnetic monopoles. So this book is all about why researchers of physics and engineers keep getting the number 938MeV when they should be getting the number 840 MeV + 105 MeV = 945 MeV.

Cover Picture is a proton torus of 8 rings with a muon of 1 ring inside the proton torus, doing the Faraday Law and producing magnetic monopoles.
Length: 17 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : December 18, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 17 pages
• File Size : 698 KB
• ASIN : B082WYGVNG
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

#1-4, 105th published book

Atom Geometry is Torus Geometry // Atom Totality series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Since all atoms are doing the Faraday Law inside them, of their thrusting muon into a proton coil in the shape of a geometry torus, then the torus is the geometry of each and every atom. But then we must explain the neutrons since the muon and proton are doing Faraday's Law, then the neutron needs to be explained in terms of this proton torus with muon inside, all three shaped as rings. The muon is a single ring and each proton is 8 rings. The neutron is shaped like a plate and is solid not hollow. The explanation of a neutron is that of a capacitor storing what the proton-muon rings produce in electricity. Where would the neutron parallel plates be located? I argue in this text that the neutron plates when fully grown from 1 eV until 945MeV are like two parallel plate capacitors where each neutron is part of one plate, like two pieces of bread with the proton-muon torus being a hamburger patty.

Cover Picture: I assembled two atoms in this picture where the proton torus with a band of muons inside traveling around and around the proton torus producing electricity. And the pie-plates represent neutrons as parallel-plate capacitors.
Length: 39 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : March 24, 2020
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• ASIN : B086BGSNXN
• Print Length : 39 pages
• File Size : 935 KB
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,656,820 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#6413 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
#315 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
#4953 in Physics (Kindle Store)
 

#1-5, 112th published book

New Perspective on Psi^2 in the Schrodinger Equation in a Atom Totality Universe// Atom Totality series, book 5
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

I first heard of the Schrodinger equation in college chemistry class. We never actually did any problem solving with the equation, and we were only told about it. Then taking physics my next year in college and after I bought the Feynman Lectures on Physics, just for fun for side reading, three volume set did I learn what this Schrodinger equation and the Psi^2 wavefunction was about. I am not going to teach the mathematics of the Schrodinger equation and the math calculations of the Psi or Psi^2 in this book, but leave that up to the reader or student to do that from Feynman's Lectures on Physics. The purpose of this book is to give a new and different interpretation of what Psi^2 is, what Psi^2 means. Correct interpretation of physics experiments and observations turns out to be one of the most difficult tasks in all of physics.

Cover Picture: a photograph taken of me in 1993, after the discovery of Plutonium Atom Totality, and I was 43 years old then, on a wintery hill of New Hampshire. It is nice that Feynman wrote a physics textbook series, for I am very much benefitting from his wisdom. If he had not done that, getting organized in physics by writing textbooks, I would not be writing this book.. And I would not have discovered the true meaning of the Fine Structure Constant, for it was Feynman who showed us that FSC is really 0.0854, not that of 0.0072. All because 0.0854 is Psi, and Psi^2 is 0.0072.
Length: 20 pages

Product details
• ASIN : B0875SVDC7
• Publication date : April 15, 2020
• Language: : English
• File size : 1134 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 20 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #240,066 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #65 in General Chemistry & Reference
◦ #481 in Physics (Kindle Store)

#1-6, 135th published book

QED in Atom Totality theory where proton is a 8 ring torus and electron = muon inside proton doing Faraday Law// Atom Totality series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)  
Since the real true electron of atoms is the muon and is a one ring bar magnet thrusting through the 8 ring torus of a proton, we need a whole entire new model of the hydrogen atom. Because the Bohr model with the 0.5MeV particle jumping orbitals as the explanation of Spectral Lines is all wrong. In this vacuum of explaining spectral line physics, comes the AP Model which simply states that the hydrogen atom creates Spectral lines because at any one instant of time 4 of the 8 proton rings is "in view" and the electricity coming from those 4 view rings creates spectral line physics.

Cover Picture: Is a imitation of the 8 ring proton torus, with my fingers holding on the proton ring that has the muon ring perpendicular and in the equatorial plane of the proton rings, thrusting through. This muon ring is the same size as the 8 proton rings making 9 x 105MeV = 945MeV of energy. The muon ring has to be perpendicular and lie on the equator of the proton torus. Surrounding the proton-torus would be neutrons as skin or coating cover and act as capacitors in storing the electricity produced by the proton+muon.

Click here to read the complete article

On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 3:59:12 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 26, 2021 at 3:57:48 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, where none can do a valid, let alone geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, on the first page of a search for them..
> >
>
> I guess you will also want

Terry Tao, Scott Contini, Sam Maksimovich, Mr. Pezevenk,

Kibo Parry Moroney's kookfight On Saturday, June 5, 2021 at 2:12:07 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics

Sorry I am missing my glasses and is that a kookfight emoji by kibo

Google came into existence at the nexus of Old Math-- journal editors as little dictators of math journals, where the old method of math proofs was merely a country club of old men trying to secure favors, but never concerned about "math truth". Time and time again in Old Math with their journal editors being corrupt for math and printing b.s. as the truth. We see it today in Jill Pipher's AMS refusing to admit to the truth that a single cone slant cut is the OVAL never the ellipse, and here Jill is supposed to be all about math truth, not her corrupt stance to keep AP out of the news, to deny even the fact that Jill is terrible in math, for Jill does not even recognize that calculus is geometry, yet there she sits with her mindless limit analysis of a fake proof.

So in this world of country club fake math proffered onto the world public as the 1990s was the last decade before the Internet can expose fakery and corruption like that of Andrew Wiles, being perhaps the last fake con-artist mathematician driven with the power of having had a Journal editor dictatorship to get his awful abhorrent FLT across the finish line.

For in this new world of SCIENCE REPORTING, because the Internet is here and many many people can offer their wisdom and not the corrupt country club having it all their way, 100% their way with all objections muffled and stifled. Here the Internet has replaced Science Reporting to large extent and opened the doors to Free Speech in Science. Wiles can run, but his proof is going nowhere but the trashpile of shame.

And so, Wiles and Tao and Hales have enlisted Google Search engines to better their corruption of math by stacking their search lists all in favor of their con-artistry. But, unknown to them, it is just because of the Freedom of Speech that the Internet offers, that their use of Google Search as a propaganda tool in the favor of Wiles, Tao, Hales, and in physics Weinberg, Glashow, Higgs, it is the Internet that exposes the corruption of corrupt scientists, who play with the Truth of Science all to garner fame and fortune, but never the truth.

Wiles never proved FLT and in fact was so so very stupid on FLT that his tiny math mind never realized Euler had no proof of FLT in exponent 3 and Wiles depended his entire argument on having a Euler proof of exponent 3.

So, the trouble with Google Search in this new era of science reporting, is that Google Search is pandering to corrupt con-artists with never a COUNTERPOINT hit on the first page of a major issue of science. Tao's and Wiles's and Hales's Google search hits are in the millions and all of them sugar coated b.s. All of them "baby boy genius or award trophy cabinet stock full"

Yet, not a single one of these con-artists of math admit that calculus is geometry and where is their geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

So Google Search, needs and requires a Counterpoint hit on 1st page of Tao, Hales, Wiles. Google is a JOURNALISM platform and good journalism like PBS Newshour never has just always the opinion of Republicans only, with never a Democrat viewpoint. Yet Google up to this date is slanted all in one direction-- the IQ of baby boy genius Tao who is so stupid in math that he never can do a geometry proof of Calculus FTC.

The true proof, the valid proof of FLT was given by AP, and although Wiles did not steal AP's proof, Wiles did steal AP's fair share of fame and awards, for no-one has proven FLT until AP did so in 1991.

We will see, if the Internet not only changes how Science is reported, but whether the Internet, now can mete out justice on Wiles stealing the fame and fortune of FLT proof, stealing it from AP. Whether the Internet also serves as a Justice platform and removes the trophy cabinet from Wiles for his fake and corrupt FLT, his nonsense of a proof.

2) AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.
0 views
Subscribe
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
4:50 PM (now)



to
AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Jun 23, 2021, 11:01 AM



to sci.math
AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.

A short list of errors by Andrew Wiles on his FLT.

1) Reductio ad Absurdum is never a proof method that is valid in mathematics, and it shows on Wiles's FLT for he is never able to bridge over and prove the Generalized FLT, in fact, his method sits there as a one off-- math offering, unable to kindle the proof of any other math conjecture. (See AP's book on fixing Logic below).

2) Wiles was so backwards in research in FLT that he failed to see that Euler's offering of a proof on exponent 3 of FLT was not a proof either, for Euler forgot the case of when x, y, z are three even numbers in x^3 + y^3 = z^3. And Wiles proof-offering is dependent on Euler having had a proof in exponent 3 for his elliptic curves.

3) A genuine true proof of FLT is able to easily bridge the gap of Generalized FLT of that of A^x + B^y = C^z, all A,B,C,x,y,z being Counting Numbers. Yet Andrew Wiles offering fails miserably on that account. But AP's proof based on Counting Numbers Basis Vector of 2+2 = 2x2 = 2^2 = 4, yet for exponent 3, no basis vector exists such that n+n+n = nxnxn = n^3 = a actual counting number.

Andrew Wiles did not steal AP's proof, but Andrew Wiles stole all the fame and fortune of the true world's first proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Andrew Wiles offering is a fakery, a con-artist job of massive publicity all because he was a head editor of a math journal at Princeton University. This allowed him extra privileges of propanganda and brainwash of the general public. But we are going to see if the power of the world's Internet can bring to light the fact that AP did the world's first proof of Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993, and that Wiles had stolen the honors from AP with his joke of a offering.

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

5th published book

Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Click here to read the complete article

> Google came into existence at the nexus of Old Math-- journal editors as little dictators of math journals, where the old method of math proofs was merely a country club of old men trying to secure favors, but never concerned about "math truth". Time and time again in Old Math with their journal editors being corrupt for math and printing b.s. as the truth. We see it today in Jill Pipher's AMS refusing to admit to the truth that a single cone slant cut is the OVAL never the ellipse, and here Jill is supposed to be all about math truth, not her corrupt stance to keep AP out of the news, to deny even the fact that Jill is terrible in math, for Jill does not even recognize that calculus is geometry, yet there she sits with her mindless limit analysis of a fake proof.

Andrew Wiles is probably the last of his kind in mathematics, where a fool of math trumps up his achievements which are hollow and nonexistent, all because his over testosterone to gain fame and fortune, the truth of math be damn. The fool Wiles cannot even see that Euler had no valid proof in exponent 3, yet that very same fool thinks he proved FLT. Wiles never belonged in math, perhaps a accountant or bank teller, for there you need not have to prove something, just do a honest days work.

And so Google, being new to the world in the 1990s, never realized that they are JOURNALISM and good journalism never covers only one side of a issue, but the other side. And here, Google failed proper journalism with their obnoxious 5 million hits all saying what a great mathematician, and the AP Counterpoint never showing up in a biased propaganda Google Search. Only if you search "Andrew Wiles Plutonium" do you get the fair balanced Counterpoint. But this Counterpoint should be on the first page of all Google search hits of "Andrew Wiles".

If Google can be fair with Counterpoint on Harvard's Dr. Hau, then no excuse for Google to be fair with Andrew Wiles, the flunky of math with not even a geometry proof of Calculus, FTC.
>
> So in this world of country club fake math proffered onto the world public as the 1990s was the last decade before the Internet can expose fakery and corruption like that of Andrew Wiles, being perhaps the last fake con-artist mathematician driven with the power of having had a Journal editor dictatorship to get his awful abhorrent FLT across the finish line.
>
> For in this new world of SCIENCE REPORTING, because the Internet is here and many many people can offer their wisdom and not the corrupt country club having it all their way, 100% their way with all objections muffled and stifled. Here the Internet has replaced Science Reporting to large extent and opened the doors to Free Speech in Science. Wiles can run, but his proof is going nowhere but the trashpile of shame.
>
> And so, Wiles and Tao and Hales have enlisted Google Search engines to better their corruption of math by stacking their search lists all in favor of their con-artistry. But, unknown to them, it is just because of the Freedom of Speech that the Internet offers, that their use of Google Search as a propaganda tool in the favor of Wiles, Tao, Hales, and in physics Weinberg, Glashow, Higgs, it is the Internet that exposes the corruption of corrupt scientists, who play with the Truth of Science all to garner fame and fortune, but never the truth.
>
> Wiles never proved FLT and in fact was so so very stupid on FLT that his tiny math mind never realized Euler had no proof of FLT in exponent 3 and Wiles depended his entire argument on having a Euler proof of exponent 3.
>
> So, the trouble with Google Search in this new era of science reporting, is that Google Search is pandering to corrupt con-artists with never a COUNTERPOINT hit on the first page of a major issue of science. Tao's and Wiles's and Hales's Google search hits are in the millions and all of them sugar coated b.s. All of them "baby boy genius or award trophy cabinet stock full"
>
> Yet, not a single one of these con-artists of math admit that calculus is geometry and where is their geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
>
> So Google Search, needs and requires a Counterpoint hit on 1st page of Tao, Hales, Wiles. Google is a JOURNALISM platform and good journalism like PBS Newshour never has just always the opinion of Republicans only, with never a Democrat viewpoint. Yet Google up to this date is slanted all in one direction-- the IQ of baby boy genius Tao who is so stupid in math that he never can do a geometry proof of Calculus FTC.
>
> The true proof, the valid proof of FLT was given by AP, and although Wiles did not steal AP's proof, Wiles did steal AP's fair share of fame and awards, for no-one has proven FLT until AP did so in 1991.
>
> We will see, if the Internet not only changes how Science is reported, but whether the Internet, now can mete out justice on Wiles stealing the fame and fortune of FLT proof, stealing it from AP. Whether the Internet also serves as a Justice platform and removes the trophy cabinet from Wiles for his fake and corrupt FLT, his nonsense of a proof.
>
> 2) AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.
> 0 views
> Subscribe
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 4:50 PM (now)
> 
> 
> 
> to
> AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.
>
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> Jun 23, 2021, 11:01 AM
> 
> 
> 
> to sci.math
> AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.
>
> A short list of errors by Andrew Wiles on his FLT.
>
> 1) Reductio ad Absurdum is never a proof method that is valid in mathematics, and it shows on Wiles's FLT for he is never able to bridge over and prove the Generalized FLT, in fact, his method sits there as a one off-- math offering, unable to kindle the proof of any other math conjecture. (See AP's book on fixing Logic below).
>
> 2) Wiles was so backwards in research in FLT that he failed to see that Euler's offering of a proof on exponent 3 of FLT was not a proof either, for Euler forgot the case of when x, y, z are three even numbers in x^3 + y^3 = z^3. And Wiles proof-offering is dependent on Euler having had a proof in exponent 3 for his elliptic curves.
>
> 3) A genuine true proof of FLT is able to easily bridge the gap of Generalized FLT of that of A^x + B^y = C^z, all A,B,C,x,y,z being Counting Numbers. Yet Andrew Wiles offering fails miserably on that account. But AP's proof based on Counting Numbers Basis Vector of 2+2 = 2x2 = 2^2 = 4, yet for exponent 3, no basis vector exists such that n+n+n = nxnxn = n^3 = a actual counting number.
>
> Andrew Wiles did not steal AP's proof, but Andrew Wiles stole all the fame and fortune of the true world's first proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. Andrew Wiles offering is a fakery, a con-artist job of massive publicity all because he was a head editor of a math journal at Princeton University. This allowed him extra privileges of propanganda and brainwash of the general public. But we are going to see if the power of the world's Internet can bring to light the fact that AP did the world's first proof of Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993, and that Wiles had stolen the honors from AP with his joke of a offering.
>
> 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
>
> 5th published book
>
> Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 29Mar2021. This is AP's 5th published book of science.
> Preface:
> First comes Logic-- think straight and clear which many logic and math professors are deaf dumb and blind to, and simply refuse to recognize and fix their errors.
>
> The single biggest error of Old Logic of Boole and Jevons was their "AND" and "OR" connectors. They got them mixed up and turned around. For their logic ends up being that of 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = either 3 or 2 but never 5, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 (addition) with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 (subtraction). The AND connector in Logic stems from the idea, the mechanism involved, that given a series of statements, if just one of those many statements has a true truth value, then the entire string of statements is overall true, and thus AND truth table is truly TTTF and never TFFF. And secondly, their error of the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a probability end conclusion.
>
> My corrections of Old Logic have a history that dates before 1993, sometime around 1991, I realized the Euclid proof of infinitude of primes was illogical, sadly sadly wrong, in that the newly formed number by "multiply the lot and add 1" was necessarily a new prime in the indirect proof method. So that my history of fixing Old Logic starts in 1991, but comes to a synthesis of correcting all four of the connectors of Equal/not, And, Or, If->Then, by 2015.
>
> Cover picture: some may complain my covers are less in quality, but I have a good reason for those covers-- I would like covers of math or logic to show the teacher's own handwriting as if he were back in the classroom writing on the blackboard or an overhead projector.
> Length: 72 pages
>
> File Size: 773 KB
> Print Length: 72 pages
> Publication Date: March 12, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PMB69F5
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled
> X-Ray: Not Enabled
> Word Wise: Not Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
> #6-2, 27th published book
>
> Correcting Reductio Ad Absurdum// Teaching True Logic series, book 2 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> Last revision was 9NOV2020. This is AP's 27th published book.
>
> Preface:
> These are the TRUE Truth Tables of the 4 connectors of Logic
>
> Equal+Not
> T = T = T
> T = ~F = T
> F = ~T = T
> F = F = T
>
> If--> then
> T --> T = T
> T --> F = F
> F --> T = U (unknown or uncertain)
> F --> F = U (unknown or uncertain)
>
> And
> T & T = T
> T & F = T
> F & T = T
> F & F = F
>
>
> Or
> T or T = F
> T or F = T
> F or T = T
> F or F = F
>
> Those can be analyzed as being Equal+Not is multiplication. If-->then is division. And is addition and Or is subtraction in mathematics. Now I need to emphasis this error of Old Logic, the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a probability unknown, undefined end conclusion.
>
> Now in Old Logic they had for Reductio Ad Absurdum as displayed by this schematic:
>
> | | ~p
> | |---
> | | .
> | | .
> | | q
> | | .
> | | .
> | | ~q
> | p
>
> Which is fine except for the error of not indicating the end conclusion of "p" is only a probability of being true, not guaranteed as true. And this is the huge huge error that mathematicians have fallen victim of. For the Reductio Ad Absurdum is not a proof method for mathematics, it is probability of being true or false. Math works on guaranteed truth, not probability. This textbook is written to fix that error.
> Length: 86 pages
>
> Product details
> • ASIN : B07Q18GQ7S
> • Publication date : March 23, 2019
> • Language : English
> • File size : 1178 KB
> • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Word Wise : Not Enabled
> • Print length : 86 pages
> • Lending : Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #346,875 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #28 in Logic (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #95 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> ◦ #217 in Mathematical Logic
> •
>
> #6-3, 143rd published book
>
> DeMorgan's Laws are fantasies, not laws// Teaching True Logic series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> By Archimedes Plutonium
>
> Last revision was 30Apr2021. This is AP's 143rd published book.
>
> Preface: The Logic community never had the correct truth table of the primitive 4 connectors of Logic, (1) Equal compounded with NOT, (2) AND, (3) OR, (4) IF->THEN. In 1800s, the founders of Logic messed up in terrible error all 4 of the primitive logic connectors. And since the 1990s, AP has wanted an explanation of why Old Logic got all 4 connectors in total error? What was the reason for the mess up? And in the past few years, I finally pinned the reason to starting Logic with DeMorgan's fake laws, from which Boole, a close friend of DeMorgan, was going to keep his friendship and accept the DeMorgan Laws. That meant that DeMorgan, Boole, Jevons accepted OR as being that of Either..Or..Or..Both, what is called the inclusive OR. But the inclusive OR is a contradiction in terms, for there never can exist a combo of OR with AND simultaneously. This book goes into detail why the DeMorgan laws are fake and fantasy.
>
> Cover Picture: Looks a bit rough, but I want students and readers to see my own handwriting as if this were a lecture and the cover picture a blackboard where I write out DeMorgan's two (fake) laws of logic.
>
> Product details
> • File Size : 620 KB
> • Word Wise : Enabled
> • Print Length : 38 pages
> • ASIN : B08M4BY4XM
> • Publication Date : October 27, 2020
> • Language: : English
> • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • Lending : Enabled
> •
> •
>
>
>
> #6-4, 100th published book
>
> Pragmatism, the only Philosophy I loved // Teaching True Logic series, book 4 Kindle Edition
> By Archimedes Plutonium
>
> I need to give credit to the philosophy of Pragmatism, the only philosophy that I know of that is based on science. Credit for my discovery of the Plutonium Atom Totality in 1990, came in part, partially due to a passage of the Pragmatist Charles Sanders Peirce in Peirce's Cosmology:
>
> Peirce's The Architecture of Theories...
> ...would be a Cosmogonic Philosophy. It would suppose that in the beginning - infinitely remote - there was a chaos of unpersonalized feeling, which being without connection or regularity would properly be without existence.. This feeling, sporting here and there in pure arbitrariness, would have
> started the germ of a generalizing tendency. Its other sportings would be evanescent, but this would have a growing virtue. Thus, the tendency to habit would be started; and from this, with the other principles of evolution, all the regularities of the universe would be evolved. At any time, however, an element of pure chance survives and will remain until the world becomes an absolutely perfect, rational, and symmetrical system, in which mind is at last crystallized in the infinitely distant future.
> --- end quoting Peirce's Cosmology ---
>
> But also I must give credit to Pragmatism for making it a philosophy one can actually live their lives by, for living a life of pragmatic solutions to everyday problems that occur in my life. A case in point example is now in March 2020, being the pragmatist that I am, and enduring the 2020 corona virus pandemic. No other philosophy that I know of is so keenly in tune with a person, the surrounding environment and how to live.
> Length: 123 pages
>
> Product details
> • File size : 807 KB
> • Word Wise : Enabled
> • Print length : 123 pages
> • Publication date : March 14, 2020
> • ASIN : B085X863QW
> • Language: : English
> • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Lending : Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #4,160,707 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #61,471 in Philosophy (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #193,599 in Science & Math (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #240,849 in Philosophy (Books)
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> June 23, 2021, 12:31 PM
> 
> 
> 
> to sci.math
> Andrew Wiles's FLT is a fakery of mathematics, and he was honored not for a math proof, but for a fakery, and let us see if the Internet gives justice to AP over the stealing of honors by Andrew Wiles.

Click here to read the complete article

Yet, not a single one of these con-artists of math admit that calculus is geometry and where is their geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

2) AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.

AP proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1991-1993 while Andrew Wiles has a fake proof of FLT.

A short list of errors by Andrew Wiles on his FLT.

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.

Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.

5th published book

Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Click here to read the complete article

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

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.

Click here to read the complete article

🕷 of Math and 🕸️ of Physics Archimedes "Court Jester of Physics"
Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:

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

Google, thanks a lot, this thread "63,231 Student Victims of Michael Meighan..." appears on 2nd page of a Google Search of "Michael Meighen McGill", and of course to help relieve students from the massive propaganda torture of Old Math and Old Physics, we please need this thread on 1st page of Google Search list, not 2nd page.

Please, Google, in the interest of Fair Balanced Journalism, we need this Google Search hit as Counterpoint on the 1st page of "Michael Meighan McGill", not the 2nd page.

The truth of science always wins out, and especially when it involves the young, for the young do not want propaganda and brainwash crammed down their throats, they want only truth, and takes top priority over all other aspects of college life, even sports and football, as Michael can well relate.

Google please get a CounterPoint on Rose M Patten and Linda Hasenfratz on 1st page, for torturing students is a ugly affair.

To have a Geometry Proof of Calculus, the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, you cannot have Reals as the number system of mathematics, for Reals cannot provide empty space from one point to a next successor point. You need discrete geometry to have a Calculus, that means you throw out the Reals and have Decimal Grid Numbers be mathematics. For surely, everyone wants to keep Calculus. Next, you cannot have negative numbers or 0 be on one side of a equation in mathematics, for that causes there to be 4 quadrants in mathematics and Calculus can only exist when you have 1st Quadrant Only. Next, you need your integral to be a square or rectangle for the Y= x^2 is a square box, and is a polynomial and the derivative must be a cut-away of a square at a midpoint of one side of the square giving you a right-triangle. This means the only type of function in mathematics that allows for a Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is the Polynomial Function. That means, ever type of function, if not already a polynomial must be translated into a polynomial over a specified interval.

All of these constraints must come together in order to have a Geometrical Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, and we all must have a calculus.

11th published book

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

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.

Length: 137 pages

Mathopedia-- Listing of 70 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. 39) AP's 174th book.

Last revision was 28JUN2021.

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

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

Click here to read the complete article

3- PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 130 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics. AP's 175th book; soon to be published as a Kindle book.

Last revision was 7Aug2021.

Details of all of these entries found in several of these already published books such as 74th published book

HISTORY OF THE PROTON MASS and the 945 MeV //Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author). Or such as 2nd published book

True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author).

Preface: I suppose, going forward, physics should always have a physicsopedia, where major parts of physics are held under question, under suspicion as to correctness. In past history we have called them as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet physics, can have no permanent mainstream. And theories passing as "standard model" is a travesty of science, of logical thinking and just a wide open door of physics corruption and tedious nonsense. The Standard Model of Old Physics is a example of "numerology and algebras turned from circus act into the physics mainstream".

1) The picture of electricity and how it works was only truly begun in 2020 with the cover of this book showing electricity as closed loops, hoola hoops and how these loops flow in circuits taking on the shape of those circuits at the speed of light, where the flowing entity are magnetic monopoles-dipoles and photons. Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1
by Archimedes Plutonium.

2) The thoughts and images of electrons in Old Physics and Old Chemistry were horrendously error filled. The first place I see this huge error is in Feynman Lectures on Physics, not that I want to pick on Feynman for he is one of my heroes, but rather I chose Feynman because his Lectures have been translated into almost all languages and his books widely available and known. On page 14-10 of Volume 1, Feynman... And news out of Princeton Univ as of May 2021, where they are finding that the 0.5MeV Dirac magnetic monopole comes in pairs, even though the Princeton researchers are too stupid yet to know that the 0.5MeV particle is not the atom's electron.

3) Old Physics never had a Primal axiom of Physics-- All is atom and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Old Physics wasted too much time on General Relativity (a fake theory) in the 20th century and too little time on electricity and magnetism.

4) New Physics starts with electricity and magnetism. Old Physics always started with idealizations such as linear momentum, and a force of gravity that had no relation to electricity and magnetism. Idealization physics is more imagination than about the truth of the world.

5) New Physics has the correct particles of physics where the proton is 840MeV, the real electron is the muon of 105MeV and is stuck inside the proton torus thrusting through the proton and producing electricity in the Faraday law. The 0.5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole.

6) The true cosmology theory of science is the Atom Totality theory which began to replace the Big Bang theory starting 1990.

7) Big Bang theory is a joke, never a reality. And a outright contradiction of the Atomic theory, that all matter is composed of atoms. For all matter can be interchanged with "all things". If all things are atoms, then the universe itself , we must admit if we are logical thinkers, is "a thing" and thus the universe must be a atom also. Big Bang contradicts Logic. And if science is anything, it is logical.

8) When you find in the world, a Generalization of All Matter is made up of Atoms. You have to go with the Logic as the truth. If all Matter is atoms, then the Whole of the Universe is Matter, you must continue to the conclusion that the Whole is also an Atom. If you do not make that conclusion, you have to thence say-- All Matter except the Universe, and that is a silly end conclusion.

9) A second major physics fallacy is their screwing up of the 1897 Thomson particle they called the electron of 0.5MeV when it is the Dirac magnetic monopole that Thomson had found. It would not be until 1936 that the true electron of atoms is discovered and called the muon. What the 1897 screw-up mis-identity shows most of all, is that physicists throughout the 20th century never had a handle on what angular momentum means. If you understand angular momentum, you would realize that a proton at 938MeV and electron at 0.5MeV cannot support the existence of a hydrogen atom, or any atom for that sake.

10) Direct consequence of muon being the true electron, determines that the proton is 840MeV and the muon is stuck inside the proton doing a Faraday Law of producing new electricity by turning Space into electromagnetism. This is Dirac's new radioactivity and is the creation of new mass, matter in Space. This means all stars shine not from fusion, but from Faraday Law. Not only do stars grow more massive and bigger, but that all astro-bodies grow bigger. Meaning the Nebular Dust Cloud theory is a gigantic hoax for the growing of the Solar System.

11) Stars shine not from fusion, but from the muon thrusting through its proton coil. Every atom inside a star and every proton in that star is making new electricity from its muon thrusting through its proton 8 ring coil tokamak.

12) A direct consequence that the muon is stuck inside the proton in all experiments, is this Logical Principle, that in physics, every particle or subatomic particle has a function, a job, a task. Principles of Science are some of the most important teachings and understandings in science. One has a logical hole in the head if they think you can have particles of physics, and those particles have no job, no function, no task to perform. Existence in physics means-- a job to do.

13) A New Periodic Table of Chemical Elements must emerge from a mistaken electron as 0.5MeV when it truly is 105MeV, the muon. Such a table is based not on a Lewis structure of 8 but rather on 6. There are 6 successive elements in a row, and only 6 in a row. See AP's book for details: Research Notebook of AP on True Chemistry Periodic Table of Elements based on 6, not the error-filled table of Old Chemistry, Chemistry Series, book 5. The nucleus of atoms are toruses inside larger toruses, not the Rutherford model of a massive nucleus that was sort of stationary. No, the nucleus is a smaller torus going around in circles inside a large torus, and making more electricity.

14) Nebular Dust Cloud theory is purely a hoax, for the Universe has some 10^11 planet systems, and to think that Nebular Dust is spread so evenly throughout the Universe, when supernova are rare, is a colossal logic brain dump. According to Dirac, each and every atom is growing bigger in the universe every second and minute of the day, just as Dirac implied with his "new radioactivities" in his book "Directions in Physics". AP suggests only a half brain would need something as stupid silly as a Nebular Dust Cloud scattered uniformly from rare supernova, here, there, and everywhere.

15) Direct consequence of Faraday law going on inside each and every atom means the Sun will go Red Giant phase starting now and completed in 140 million years where Earth is like Venus-- not habitable by life. Before the end of 1 to 10 million years hence forward of August 2020, if humanity has not colonized Mars, Europa, Pluto, there is a good chance humanity goes extinct.

16) The most important number in all of science for humanity, is the number for the yearly increase in Solar radiation by our Sun. As of year 2020, NASA has the figure pegged at 0.005% yearly increase in total solar radiation.. This easily explains a loss of total Insects on Earth at 25% total insect biomass for the past decade. This is a huge alarm bell, for it means, unless humanity makes its future home on Europa, Mars and Pluto, the entire human species goes extinct, and as the Sun further goes Red Giant, humanity must constantly go further out away from the Sun.

17) Following mistakes of Old Physics is their Unification of Forces, and that they followed a science nitwit of Einstein with his General Relativity, rather than follow the giant of physics of James Clerk Maxwell and continue on with electricity and magnetism as being gravity. No, most of the physicists of the 20th century were airheads following a fakester of Einstein. This is as much a lesson in sociology as is physics. If you follow someone, you better be sure he/she is correct thoroughly correct. Otherwise it is just idiotic hero worship.

18) Black Holes-- invented by the most ignorant and stupid physicists whose imagination wants to violate the Pauli Exclusion Principle and gain fame and fortune with a brain that has no logical marbles at all. Black hole people were followers of the deluded Einstein with his General Relativity. If you believe in black-holes, you really do not belong in science, and so stupid, that you probably would even fail science fiction. A simple test of any scientist,-- do you believe in black holes-- and shown the exit door of science as a career.

19) Dark Matter, Dark Energy-- this was invented by a group of logical brain dead physicists looking at galaxy rotations and seeing that there was not enough mass in Newton's law of gravity to account for this fast rotation of galaxies, these physicists opted for fame and fortune, rather than admit Electricity and Magnetism, not Newton gravity, causes galaxy rotation. Here again is the power of sociology of follow a leader-- Einstein and his deluded General Relativity. Much of the 20th century physics was a waste of time in following the delusions of Einstein, when it should have followed Maxwell of 1860s then Bohr's quantum mechanics.

Click here to read the complete article

Subject	Author
3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles,	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Dave Richardson
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: Archimedes "gigatard" Plutonium flunked the math test of a	Michael Moroney
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew	Archimedes Plutonium
Re: 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence	Archimedes Plutonium
WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science	Dan Christensen
Re: WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of AP's fake math and science	Archimedes Plutonium

Why won't sharks eat lawyers? Professional courtesy.

tech / sci.math / 3-Google we need you to have a Balanced Search hit on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, where none can do a valid, let alone geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, on the first page of a search for them.