2-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)

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)

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)

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)

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

"Are you the same Archimedes Plutonium being mentioned on this old blog post?:

https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/01/31/where-have-all-the-usenet-kooks-gone/

If so, then wow! You've basically wasted your life in a sense.

I suppose in another sense the stamina is quite impressive and you might get logged in some future internet historian's notes on this kind of behaviour (is that the goal, a kind of thin residual abstract immortality?).

John Gabriel can only fantasize about earning such a historical footnote at this point. I have told him he'd be better off trying to save up for a module or two at the Open University so he could actually study towards being a real mathematician, but you can only help people that want to be helped I guess."

Ross's baseball cards of 4 lunatics of math collection-- Terry Tao, Scott Contini, Sam Maksimovich, Mr. Pezevenk.

On Sunday, May 30, 2021 at 1:56:52 PM UTC-5, ross.pro...@gmx.com wrote:
> I suppose in another sense the stamina is quite impressive and you might get logged in some future internet historian's notes on this kind of behaviour (is that the goal, a kind of thin residual abstract immortality?).
>

AP writes: hey Ross do you play the game of flip-the-cards and heads or tails wins the jackpot.
Do you have the baseball cards of the 4 lunatic math professors-- Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell-- never knew calculus was geometry for they never realized Fundamental Theorem of Calculus needed a geometry proof. Never got on base, nor made a hit.

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)

🦨 of Math and 🦟 of Physics Archimedes "little fish" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
> Ross's baseball cards of 4 lunatics of math collection-- Terry Tao, Scott Contini, Sam Maksimovich, Mr. Pezevenk.
>
> On Sunday, May 30, 2021 at 1:56:52 PM UTC-5, ross.pro...@gmx.com wrote:
>> I suppose in another sense the stamina is quite impressive and you might get logged in some future internet historian's notes on this kind of behaviour (is that the goal, a kind of thin residual abstract immortality?).
>>
>
> AP writes: hey Ross do you play the game of flip-the-cards and heads or tails wins the jackpot.
> Do you have the baseball cards of the 4 lunatic

I have the complete set. They read Ludwig Hansen, Ludwig van Ludvig,
Ludwig Plutonium and Archimedes Plutonium. Highly collectible! NOT.

Kibo Parry M. on Kookfight of Terry Tao, Scott Contini, Sam Maksimovich, Mr.. Pezevenk

1> Kibo Parry M. on Dartmouth💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge" Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner, Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble,
On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 1:08:17 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Kꙩꙩkfight!!!
> > Michael Moroney's profile photo
> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 8:24:00 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > fails at math and science:
> Michael Moroney wrote
> > Jun 20, 2021, 11:11:48 PM
> > 
> > 💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge"
> > Michael Moroney's profile photo
> > Michael Moroney wrote
> > 11:29 AM
>
> On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 12:55:53 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > "FireD your ass"
> > >
> Dartmouth College: Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble, Asher Auel, Peter Doyle, Anne Gelb, Marcia Groszek, Ethan Levien, Peter J Mucha, Rosa C. Orellana, Scott D. Pauls, Daniel N. Rockmore, Thomas R. Shemanske, John, D Trout, Erik van Erp, John Voight, Dorothy I. Wallace, David L. Webb, Dana P. Williams, Peter Winkler
> Miles P. Blencowe, Robert R. Caldwell, Brian Charles Chabover, Richard Denton, Robert A. Fesen, Marcelo Gleiser, Ryan Hickox, Mary K. Hudson, James William LaBelle, Kristina Anne Lynch, Robyn Millan, Hans Mueller, Elisabeth Newton, Roberto Onofrio, Alex Rimberg, Barrett N. Rogers, John R. Thorstensen, Lorenza Viola, Martin N. Wybourne, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 1:14:40 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > "Drag Queen of Science"
> > fails at math and scienc
> On Thursday, June 17, 2021 at 9:58:14 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > fails at math and science:

AP started a World Revolution in College textbooks in that students read for free the worlds finest math textbooks available-- containing geometry proofs of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

#4-1, 134th published book

Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.

Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.

Product details
• ASIN : B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date : September 24, 2020
• Language : English
• File size : 576 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 23 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,307,085 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #1,241 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #1,345 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #10,634 in Calculus (Books)
•

#4-2, 45th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

Last revision was 2NOV2020.
Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.

This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.

It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.

Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.

Length: 375 pages

Product details
File Size: 2013 KB
Print Length: 375 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

#4-3, 55th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.

Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.

The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.

And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.

But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.

Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.

The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.

Length: 236 pages

Product details
File Size: 1390 KB
Print Length: 236 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 16, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WN9RVXD
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,212,707 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2719 in Calculus (Books)
#417 in Calculus (Kindle Store)



#4-4, 56th published book

COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

#1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads

This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
Length: 54 pages

Product details
File Size: 1035 KB
Print Length: 64 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#318 in Calculus (Books)
#48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)



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.

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

> 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)

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)

Mathopedia-- Listing of 70 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. 39) 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.

Boycott Samsung & Hyundai until they free their moon bears

Stalker Kibo Parry M and his masterpiece painting of freeing Moon Bears.

\\ ("`****/").
\\ `0_ 0 ) `-.
\\ (_&_.)' ._ )
\\ `--' / /
\\ ==(li)===========
\\
\\
two caged Moon Bears

\\ ("`****/"').
\\ `0_ 0 ) `-.
\\ (_&_.)' ._ )
\\ `--' / /
\\ ==1(li)===========
\\
\\


Ross hinting that Dr. Tao's work in math is flush down the toilet ready.
On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 12:12:13 PM UTC-5, ross.pro...@gmx.com wrote:
>comments intact for the benefit of some future internet historian writing about 'quirky online personalities', or to simply delete them all in one go.. Would anything of value be lost?
> Have a Wonderful Day

AP writes: no, I think Dr. Tao would cherish the idea of his math work flushed down the toilet all in one go, for he could not even do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. He must have grown up as a hippie in the hippie culture of Princeton Univ. Terence is so dumb in math, he still believes a ellipse is a conic in a single cone and cannot be bothered to place a Kerr lid down a paper cone constructed by a High School student in 5 minutes and see for yourself, the Oval is the slant cut.

I mean we have High School students smarter in math than Dr. Tao of UCLA.

So yes, Ross, Dr. Tao is probably in favor of a flush down the toilet.

🤮 of Math and 💩 of Physics Archimedes "Splatter-Fart-Shittee"
Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:
> So yes, Ross, Dr. Tao is probably in favor of a flush down the toilet
of Archimedes Plutonium's posts.

Dr. Tao almost certainly never heard of any "Archimedes Plutonium", but
if he did see any of his posts, he'd certainly say "Flush away!!!"

Boycott Samsung & Hyundai until they free their moon bears

Stalker Kibo Parry M and his masterpiece painting of freeing Moon Bears.

\\ ("`****/").
\\ `0_ 0 ) `-.
\\ (_&_.)' ._ )
\\ `--' / /
\\ ==(li)===========
\\
\\
two caged Moon Bears

\\ ("`****/"').
\\ `0_ 0 ) `-.
\\ (_&_.)' ._ )
\\ `--' / /
\\ ==1(li)===========
\\
\\

🦨 of Math and 🦟 of Physics Archimedes "little fish" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:

Re: 2- The four lunatics of reddit/math

1) Ludwig Hansen
2) Ludwig van Ludvig
3) Ludwig Plutonium
4) Archimedes Plutonium

Michael Moroney wrote:

> 🦨 of Math and 🦟 of Physics Archimedes "little fish" Plutonium
> <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
>
> Re: 2- The four lunatics of reddit/math
>
> 1) Ludwig Hansen 2) Ludwig van Ludvig

your country toilet paper shortage.

Terence Tao and Scott Contini > 👎🏼 of Math and 🖕🏼 of Physics drawing by
On Tuesday, August 10, 2021 at 4:21:01 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"math hater"
> tarded:
On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 12:51:09 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🤮 of Math and 💩 of Physics
>"Splatter-Fart-Shittee"

> Ross hinting that Dr. Tao's work in math is flush down the toilet ready.
> On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 12:12:13 PM UTC-5, ross.pro...@gmx.com wrote:
> >comments intact for the benefit of some future internet historian writing about 'quirky online personalities', or to simply delete them all in one go. Would anything of value be lost?
> > Have a Wonderful Day
>
> AP writes: no, I think Dr. Tao would cherish the idea of his math work flushed down the toilet all in one go, for he could not even do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. He must have grown up as a hippie in the hippie culture of Princeton Univ. Terence is so dumb in math, he still believes a ellipse is a conic in a single cone and cannot be bothered to place a Kerr lid down a paper cone constructed by a High School student in 5 minutes and see for yourself, the Oval is the slant cut.
>
> I mean we have High School students smarter in math than Dr. Tao of UCLA.
>
> So yes, Ross, Dr. Tao is probably in favor of a flush down the toilet.

👎🏼 of Math and 🖕🏼 of Physics Archimedes "science hater" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
>
>> I mean we have High School students smarter in math than Dr. Tao of UCLA.

Do you think Dr. Tao is smarter than a 7 year old? A 7 year old solved
the following problem. Can Dr. Tao solve it?

Solve this for Δ:

(p ÷ q) ÷ r = Δ ÷ (q ÷ r)

Can AP also solve this problem?

>> So yes, Ross, Dr. Tao is probably in favor of a flush down the toilet.

For AP's garbage math? Of course, that would put AP's "math" where it
belongs!

Terence Tao and Scott Contini > 👎🏼 of Math and 🖕🏼 of Physics drawing by
On Tuesday, August 10, 2021 at 4:21:01 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"math hater"
> tarded:
On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 12:51:09 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🤮 of Math and 💩 of Physics
>"Splatter-Fart-Shittee"

None can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, so stupid in math they do not even what that is.

MATHOPEDIA-- List of 74 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. AP's 174th book. Soon to be published as a Kindle book. Details of all of these are found in already published Kindle books, such as the geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

Last revision was 7Aug2021. The concept of vector is part of the unit concept and the derivative concept. So vector is duplicity.

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)

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.

Where is that stupid thread in sci.math, poising as a puzzle problem when it had no functions only pretend functions?

A few days back, 11Aug2021 appeared a stupid puzzle problem here in sci.math. Of someone pretending he had 3, 4 even 5 or 6 functions and wanting to prove equality.

Then I stepped into the conversation saying he had no functions at all, until they are converted into polynomials over a specified interval, then you can do calculus on those true real functions.

So, the world wide math community has got to begin to learn, no function is a function, until, and unless they are polynomials. This is an axiom of math and is proven true by the geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. You cannot have a FTC, if you have functions that are not polynomials.

So there is a trade off-- does math want calculus or no calculus? If you want calculus, all your functions have to be polynomials. This has to do with the concept of discrete geometry, not a continuum, for polynomials are discrete.

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.

Kibo Parry M can Peter Higgs,David Cohen,Bill Burns,Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall, Lene Hau ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. Or is Kibo Parry M too worried about his newly invented word of "analbuttfuckmanure" that Kibo invented in 2017-18 and has continued to use right through 2021 calling AP that word since AP does science while Kibo never does science, only stalker hate spew.
On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 6:12:36 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> fails at math and science:

On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 2:21:46 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> David S. Cohen "physics hater" William J. Burns
> tarded: William J. Burns
>"barking fuckdog" William J. Burns

William J. Burns psychoceramic David S. Cohen flunked the math test of a lifetime
On Wednesday, December 22, 2021 at 12:40:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> David S. Cohen "Putin's Stooge"
> blithered: William J. Burns
> > Does the science of psychology have a word for this "insane behavior by insane persons" ?
> How about the phrase "acting like William J. Burns" ?

Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
>> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> >

AP no longer tolerates permanent hate spew stalkers like Kibo Parry M. of 30 years stalking. Unacceptable that a govt agent stalks a USA citizen for almost 30 years of hate attack spew like kibo Parry Moroney and AP redacts the spew and throws it back into their lap.

William J. Burns "AnalButtfuckManure"
David S. Cohen "shitwit" flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

Kibo Parry M. wrote which AP redacted, for AP no longer can stomach the insane Kibo
On Wednesday, July 21, 2021 at 1:49:36 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>William J. Burns "AnalButtfuckManure"
> fails at math and science:
>

Kibo Parry M can Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall, Lene Hau ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. Or is Kibo Parry M too worried about his newly invented word of "analbuttfuckmanure" that Kibo invented in 2017-18 and has continued to use right through 2021 calling AP that word since AP does science while Kibo never does science, only stalker hate spew. Kibo you called MIT your invented word of 2017, are you going to call Harvard that also. And you called Dartmouth and Stanford your invented new word. I guess Harvard is special for you Kibo Parry, nonstop stalker, insane kook of 28 years.

On Thursday, October 28, 2021 at 10:48:29 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"AnalButtfuckManure"

On Monday, November 15, 2021 at 9:40:52 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"AnalButtfuckManure"

On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 7:38:34 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"Court Jester of Physics"
> fails at math and science:

Kibo, why did you invent that word in 2017-18 and why do you still use it today in 2021, is it because you failed science and now you want to curse those that succeed???

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.

Is the NSF paying the 4 lunatics of math along with Kibo Parry Moron?? S.Panchanathan, F.Crim,Brian Stone,James S.Olvestad,Dorothy Aronson publishing in AMS journal along with Ken Ribet and Jill Pipher their apologies for teaching the mindless conclusion that the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse for in truth it is a Oval, because a single cone has but one axis of symmetry. To get a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry such as a cylinder. And that these math professors of AMS are begging the students to forgive them for their mindless math idiocy.
>
>
> Cambridge Math Dept
> Alan Baker, Bela Bollobas, Darwin Smith, John Coates, Timothy Gowers, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain
> 
>
> TerenceTao,AndrewWiles, Thomas Hales, Jill Pipher, Ken Ribet, John Stillwell need to go to their affiliated University student newspaper and publish their apology for teaching the brainwashed propaganda that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is in fact a Oval, never the ellipse, for a single cone has only 1 axis of symmetry.
> >
> > Because they were failures in ever recognizing a slant cut in single cone is a oval, meant they were failures all their life long in mathematics, never realizing that Calculus was geometry, and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus required a geometry proof, not their mindless dumb and stupid limit-analysis.
> >
> >
> > AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PLSDQWC
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 11, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1621 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 20 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > •
> > •
> >
> >
> > #11-2, 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 15Dec2021. 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". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQTNHMY
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 14, 2019
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 1309 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 154 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)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #11-3, 24th published book
> >
> > World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.
> >
> > Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07NMV8NQQ
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 20, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1241 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> > #11-4, 28th published book
> >
> > World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
> > Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.
> >
> > Cover picture: Shows four countries colored yellow, red, green, purple and all four are mutually adjacent. And where the Purple colored country is landlocked, so that if it were considered that a 5th color is needed, that 5th color should be purple, hence, 4 colors are sufficient.
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PZ2Y5RV
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 23, 2019
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 1183 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 34 pages
> > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> > #11-5, 6th published book
> >
> > World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 // Math proof series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Last revision was 29Apr2021. This is AP's 6th published book.
> >
> > Preface:
> > Real proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof.
> >
> > Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019, I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.
> >
> > Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.
> >
> > As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQKGW4M
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 12, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1503 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 156 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> > #11-6, 19th published book
> >
> > World's First Proof of Collatz Conjecture// Math proof series, book 6 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Last revision was 20Aug2021. This is AP's 19th published book.
> >
> > Preface: Old Math's Collatz conjecture, 1937, was this: If you land on an even number, you divide by 2 until you come to an odd number. If you come to or land on an odd number, you do a 3N+1 then proceed further. The conjecture then says that no matter what number you start with, it ends up being 1.
> >
> > What the Collatz proof of math tells us, is that so very often mathematicians pose a conjecture in which their initial formulation of the conjecture is murky, obfuscation and poorly designed statement. Such poorly designed statements can never be proven true or false. An example that comes to mind of another poorly designed conjecture is the No Odd Perfect Conjecture, in which the statement is obfuscation of factors. So for the odd number 9, is it 1+3, or is it 1+ 3 + 3. So when a mathematics conjecture is full of obfuscation and error in the statement, then these type of conjectures never have a proof. And takes a person with a logical mind to fix and straighten out the conjecture statement and then provide a proof, thereof.
> >
> > Cover picture: when I think of Collatz, I think of a slide, a slide down and so my French curve is the best slide I can think of, other than a slide-ruler, but a slide ruler is slide across.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PS98K5H
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 16, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1955 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 61 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #212,131 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #4 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #9 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #32 in Number Theory (Books)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #11-7, 20th published book
> > World's First Proofs that No Perfect Cuboid Exists// Math proof series, book 7 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Someone on the Internet posed the unproven No Perfect Cuboid, and so I took up the challenge. I am usually a sucker for geometry riddles, more so than number theory. So I obliged. Then by 2014 I proved the matter and looking back at it now in 2019, I really really do not see what all the fuss was about-- that it was not that hard not hard at all. You just have to look carefully at sets of 4 right triangles and find an Impossibility Construction, why you cannot have those 4 right triangles all with positive integer numbers for their 3 sides. But the proof method is so hugely important in math-- impossibility of construction. And, please, do not confuse that method with Reductio Ad Absurdum, for RAA is not a valid proof method in mathematics (see my logic book on RAA). But, the method of Impossible Construction, although it might look like RAA, is totally different and fully valid in all aspects.
> >
> > But now, in hindsight in March 2019, writing this up, I see a very close connection of No Perfect Cuboid to that of Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem with its equation of A^x + B^y = C^z and the way I proved Generalized FLT was with "condensed rectangles" and the No Perfect Cuboid is a 3rd Dimension object but it is 4 rectangles of 4 right triangles we inspect. And we can pursue that connection between Generalized FLT and No Perfect Cuboid further, but not now.
> >
> > Cover Picture: Is that of 4 rectangular boxes, 2 of which are cubes sitting atop a book page of the Cubic Set for the Transuranium Atoms, from the textbook "The Elements Beyond Uranium" , Seaborg, Loveland, 1990. I am always looking for connections.
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PMZQNNT
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 16, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1382 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 61 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #11-8, 21st published book
> >
> > World's First Proofs of Mathematics Oldest Unsolved Problems: No Odd Perfect and Finiteness of Perfect Numbers // Math proof series, book 8 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Last revision was 26Apr2021. And this is AP's 21st published book.
> >
> > Preface: Now my history with these proofs goes back to 1991 to 1993, and have been finessing the proofs ever since. Some math proofs just nag nag and nag you. They just cannot be settled still. Their proof is a tiny tiny sliver of impossibility that is easily overlooked. Like an optical illusion that you are mislead into, or like those pictures where you look at it one way and you see a young lady and another way you see a very old lady.
> >
> > Now the No Odd Perfect Number is not a important proof in mathematics but mostly a spectacle for it does not teach much beyond making proper correct definitions. And murky definitions is what held a proof of No Odd Perfect, other than 1, held it back. The murky definition of factors, do we include 1 or not include, for example the odd number 9, do we include 3 twice or once for that we have 1* 9 and we have 3*3 and Old Math looked at that as 1 + 3, whereas I would look at that as 1 + 3 + 3. So when you have messy definitions, murky and messy, of course no proof will be found in over 2,000 years.
> >
> > Cover Picture: Shows our modern day new reality of the situation where the definition of "perfect" was a Ancient Greek idea, steeped in murky messy idea of factors and when to add factors, that no longer is suitable for mathematics.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PN1CPRP
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 16, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1534 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 28 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> >
> > #11-9, 15th published book
> >
> > World's First Proofs of Infinitude of Twin-Primes, and Polignac Proved // Math proof series, book 9 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Circa 1991-1993, I gave an Old Math style of proof for the Infinitude of Twin Primes, modeling my proof as to a Euclid Infinitude of Primes Proof. But then came year 2009 when I found the way to make Infinity concept well-defined. Up until 2009, no-one in the world had a clear precise definition or understanding of what "infinity" was or what it means. It means a borderline between finite and infinite and the way to find this borderline is to use the Tractrix when the unit-tractrix area catches up with the area inside a unit circle is the infinity borderline and it happens to be when pi digits have three zeroes in a row, does the tractrix area equal the circle area-- hence, we reached infinity border and beyond are infinite numbers, no longer finite numbers. What that discovery does for proofs of infinitude is change all those proofs dramatically. And here in Twin-Primes and Polignac I show the reader how modern day New Math proves infinitude of any set of numbers.
> >
> >
> > Cover Picture: Is a picture of the first five twin-primes.
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PMY1YWB
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 15, 2019
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 1642 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 9 pages
> > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> > #11-10, 16th published book
> >
> > World's First Proofs of Goldbach, Legendre, Staircase Conjectures// Math proof series, book 10 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > AP proved the Goldbach Conjecture starting 1993 where the Algebra Columns is the bedrock-key of the proof involved. The Algebra Column Array is the tool and no-one was going to prove Goldbach unless they had that tool, which the 2014 post of mine makes the array tool crystal clear. So starting 1993, I posted to sci.math about Array or Algebra Column which as a tool would render all proofs of this nature. The Goldbach conjecture historically dates back to 1742, and the Legendre conjecture dates 1752-1833. The Staircase conjecture is a wholly new conjecture proposed by AP circa 2016.
> >
> > Cover: Is a Algebra Column Array sequence starting with 6 Array and then 8 Array.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PS6MR48
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 15, 2019
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1740 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 36 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #148,852 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> > #4 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
> > #38 in Number Theory (Books)
> > #7 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > 

> >
> > #11-11, 25th published book
> >
> > Disproof of Riemann Hypothesis // Math proof series, book 11 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Last revision was 31Oct2021. This is AP's 25th book of science.
> >
> > Preface: The Riemann Hypothesis was a conjecture never able to be proven and for good reason, for it was the last symptom of a rampant disease inside of mathematics. Old Math did not have the true numbers that compose mathematics. Old Math had a rag-tag ugly collection of fake numbers with their Reals, their Negative numbers compounded with Rationals compounded with Irrationals and then adding on the Imaginary. These are fake numbers, when the true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers. Because Old Math uses fake numbers, is the reason that Riemann Hypothesis just languished, languished and languished. You cannot prove something riddled in fakery. Below I demonstrate why having fake numbers in math, creates fake proofs, fake theorems, and creates a conjecture that can never be proven.
> >
> > Cover picture: Riemann Hypothesis deals with fake numbers of mathematics. When what is needed is the true numbers-- Decimal Grid Numbers. We learn Decimal Grid Numbers when very young, when just toddlers, wood counting blocks. All the true numbers of mathematics come from Mathematical Induction-- counting. Mathematical Induction is utterly absent in the Riemann Hypothesis, when it should be central to the hypothesis.
> > Length: 58 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PVDS1RC
> > Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 20, 2019
> > Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > File size ‏ : ‎ 1475 KB
> > Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > Print length ‏ : ‎ 58 pages
> > Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > Best Sellers Rank: #5,118,638 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #643 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #1,398 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #3,559 in Number Theory (Books)
> > 

> > #11-12, 152nd published book
> > The 6th Regular Polyhedron-- hexagonal faces at infinity// Math proof series, book 12
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition
> >
> > Last revision was 10Dec2021. And this is AP's 152nd published book of science.
> > Preface: This is my 152nd book of science an exciting book, and it came out of the clear blue. The writing of it took a mere week's time and it is a byproduct of my 151st book of science, TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 1st year College. Although my 151st book took me over a year to write; this book took just 1 week to write. Difference being that of a textbook versus that of a book on a specific topic, is 50 times more difficult because a textbook takes so much time in organizing, order, and fitting together pieces of each chapter in fact, whereas a single topic science book is like writing a prose story and is 50 times easier to write than a textbook.
> > While I was doing 151st, I noticed and emphasized that all of physics is determined by 6 laws of physics, and the first principle of physics is All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Then we notice that 6 laws cover all of physics, 6 laws of electricity and magnetism. We notice that all of logic and math is covered by 6 operators. And then we look at geometry's regular polyhedrons and find there are only 5 known regular polyhedron with a proof in Old Math that a 6th Regular Polyhedron cannot exist. An actual proof in Old Math that a 6th cannot exist.
> > Well, AP knows better. For AP knows that if all of Physics is written in the language of just 6 laws and all of logic and mathematics are covered by 6 operators. That AP knows Old Math made a mistake in thinking they proved 5 regular polyhedron were all that exist as regular polyhedron. So Old Math made some or several mistakes in their so called proof that 5 and only 5 regular polyhedron exist, and that is what this book covers, the 6th regular polyhedron of the world, what it is, and what it looks like.
> > Warning: the entire book is written from a sequential dated notebook, so if you read something early on, I may have changed my mind on the idea near the end. This is not a textbook, but a notebook of discovery and read it for its history.
> > Cover Picture: is my iphone photograph of a soccer ball of 20 hexagons, 12 pentagons; and a glass ball covered by netting of tiny hexagons. Both objects I use in experiments of proving the 6th Regular Polyhedron.
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09K4PWKVK
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 21, 2021
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 839 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 76 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> > #11-13, 160th published book
> >
> > MATHOPEDIA-- List of 76 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Preface:
> > A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.
> >
> > The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.
> >
> > The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.
> >
> > Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.
> >
> > 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).
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1147 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 62 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > y z
> > | /
> > | /
> > |/______ x
> >
> > More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
> >
> > In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
> >
> > I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
> >
> > There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
> >
> > Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> > Archimedes Plutonium

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

> 2- The four lunatics of reddit/math,

1) Ludwig Hansen
2) Ludwig van Ludvig
3) Ludwig Plutonium
4) Archimedes Plutonium

Michael Moroney wrote:

> 🤡 of Math and 🂿 of Physics Archimedes "Court Jester of Physics"
> Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
>
>> 2- The four lunatics of reddit/math,
>
> 1) Ludwig Hansen 2) Ludwig van Ludvig 3) Ludwig Plutonium 4) Archimedes
> Plutonium

but you already killed in millions, if not in billions already, and to
come, with your capitalist lethal injections, said "vaccines", you
stinking lying capitalist. What are you talking about, you can't handle
proportions. You disgrace.

Kibo Parry Moron shits on Dr. Panchanathan Dorothy E. Aronson fake electron, F. Fleming Crim, Brian Stone, James S. Olvestad, Philip J. Hanlon fake electron, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.

Kibo Parry Moron shits on Peter Higgs fake electron, Makoto Kobayashi, Toshihide Maskawa, Yoichiro Nambu, John C. Mather, George F. Smoot, Roy J. Glauber, David J. Gross, CSUN,Adriana Ocampo, Scott J. Horowitz, Erika D. Beck, William Karush, Lorraine Foster, Olympia LePoint, as McGinn & Pennino shit spam sci.physics every day, William Alfred Fowler, Kenneth G. Wilson, James Watson Cronin, Val Logsdon Fitch, Sheldon Lee Glashow with their silly Standard Model, can they ever multiply muon mass 105MeV by 9 and see it is within Sigma Error of the neutron and proton (alleged proton rest mass) of 940MeV. Meaning what? Meaning that the proton is a composite of 8 muon rings and the neutron is 9 muon rings. And the muon is the real true electron of atoms, stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law of creating new electrical energy-- the reason stars and Sun shine. But no, the imps of physics like Sheldon Glashow and Peter Higgs put physics knowledge and understanding backwards in time, to caveman mentality physics with their impish Standard Model.

CIA 30 year stalker Kibo Parry Moron shits on electron of David S. Cohen, NSF Panchanathan, William J.Burns, Cindy Marten
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 2:53:45 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"psychoceramic"
> "bozo"
> tarded:
> The letters in CIA, rearranged, spell "Child Manure
> Soup Time".

Re: 2- Kibo says psychoceramic Cindy Marten,Dr.Panchanathan, Miguel Cardona,David S. Cohen, William J.Burns with their ellipse conic section when it is a oval, their 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction and never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem.

---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Dr. Panchanathan , present day F. Fleming Crim, Brian Stone, James S. Olvestad, Dorothy E. Aronson
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh
Arden Lee Bement Jr.
Rita R. Colwell
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993

Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua

> > Why do imps of physics like Glashow or Higgs never understand that a do nothing electron and do nothing proton are imp reasoning in physics. Whereas AP's particles are always doing some law of Electrodynamics. And why does Nobel award imps of science, do they like imp physics instead of true physics?
> >
> > Makoto Kobayashi, Toshihide Maskawa, Yoichiro Nambu, John C. Mather, George F. Smoot, Roy J. Glauber, David J. Gross -- please, please can they ever ask the simple question, of which is the atom's true real electron, the muon or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole.
> >
> > > > > ..
> > > > > .- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
> > > > > , . `.' ' `.
> > > > > .' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
> > > > > . ; .' . `. ;
> > > > > ; . ' `. . '
> > > > > . ' ` `. |
> > > > > . '. '
> > > > > . 0 0 ' `.
> > > > > ' `
> > > > > ; `
> > > > > .' `
> > > > > ; U `
> > > > > ; '; `
> > > > > : | ;.. :` `
> > > > > : `;. ```. .-; | '
> > > > > '. ` ``.., .' :' '
> > > > > ; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am Kibo Parry Moroney, a nonstop 30 year paid stalker with my antiscience posts of 938 is 12% short of 945, I just pester people who succeed in science and laugh all the way to the bank for my stalker posts are worth $100 per post, just ask Nick Thompson of Wired Magazine how to pester people for 30 years and get on his cover page of Wired
> > > > > ` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
> > > > > ` ` ; ; ' '
> > > > > ` ` ; ; ' '
> > > > > ` `. ````'''''' ' '
> > > > > ` . ' '
> > > > > / ` `. ' ' .
> > > > > / ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
> > > > > / .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
> > > > > / .'' ; ` .' `
> > > > > ...'.' ; .' ` .' `
> > > > > "" .' .' | ` .; \ `
> > > > > ; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
> > > > > :' | ' ` , `. `
> > > > > | ' ` ' `. `
> > > > > ` ' ` ; `. |
> > > > > `.' ` ; `-'
> > > > > `...'
> >
> >
> > Robert Ingalls,David Kaplan,Univ Washington,Henry Lubatti,Lillian McDermott,Larry McLerran,Gerald Miller is the reason you have not yet confirmed real proton=840MeV, electron=105MeV, and .5MeV= Dirac magnetic monopole is offtopic Relf? Is Relf taking away your attention?
> >
> >
> > Stupid Nobel Physics prizes to those who cannot even ask the question of which is the atom's real true electron, the muon or 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole
> >
> > Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,
> > Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
> > David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane, John M. Kosterlitz, Takaaki Kajita
> > Arthur B. McDonald
> > Francois Englert
> > Saul Perlmutter
> > Brian P. Schmidt
> > Adam G. Riess
> > Makoto Kobayashi
> > Toshihide Maskawa
> > Yoichiro Nambu
> > John C. Mather
> > George F. Smoot
> > Roy J. Glauber
> > David J. Gross
> > Hugh David Politzer
> > Frank Wilczek
> > Raymond Davis Jr.
> > Masatoshi Koshiba
> > Riccardo Giacconi
> > Gerardus 't Hooft
> > Martinus J.G. Veltman
> > Jerome I. Friedman
> > Henry W. Kendall
> > Richard E. Taylor
> > Carlo Rubbia
> > Simon van der Meer
> > William Alfred Fowler
> > Kenneth G. Wilson
> > James Watson Cronin
> > Val Logsdon Fitch
> > Sheldon Lee Glashow
> > Steven Weinberg
> > .
> > .
> > little fishes
> > .
> > .
> > Layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = subtraction of either 3 or 2, while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV
> >
> > Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
> > Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
> > more and more layers of error thinking physics
> > .
> > .
> > John Baez
> > Brian Greene
> > Lisa Randall
> > Alan H. Guth
> > Michael E. Brown
> > Konstantin Batygin
> > Ben Bullock
> > Larry Harson
> > Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
> > Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
> > None at all - he was a raving nutter.
> > Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
> > Edward Witten
> >
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN : B08K47K5BB
> > • Publication date : September 25, 2020
> > • Language : English
> > • File size : 587 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise : Not Enabled
> > • Print length : 25 pages
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #291,001 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #13 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #52 in General Chemistry & Reference
> > ◦ #334 in General Chemistry
> >
> >
> >
> > #1-7, 138th published book
> > The true NUCLEUS of Atoms are inner toruses moving around in circles of a larger outer torus// Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden Experiment revisited // Atom Totality Series, book 7 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > The geometry of Atoms of the Table of Chemical Elements is torus geometry. We know this to be true for the torus geometry forms the maximum electricity production when using the Faraday Law. We see this in Old Physics with their tokamak toruses attempting to make fusion, by accelerating particles of the highest possible acceleration for the torus is that geometry. But the torus is the geometry not only of maximum acceleration but of maximum electrical generation by having a speeding bar magnet go around and around inside a torus== the Faraday law, where the torus rings are the copper closed wire loop. The protons of atoms are 8 loops of rings in a torus geometry, and the electron of atoms is the muon as bar magnet, almost the same size as the proton loops but small enough to fit inside proton loops. It is torus geometry that we investigate the geometry of all atoms.
> > Length: 41 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > • Publication Date : October 9, 2020
> > • File Size : 828 KB
> > • Word Wise : Not Enabled
> > • Print Length : 41 pages
> > • ASIN : B08KZT5TCD
> > • Language: : English
> > • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> > • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Lending : Enabled
> >
> > #1-8, 1st published book
> >
> > Atom Totality Universe, 8th edition, 2017// A history log book: Atom Totality Series book 8 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> >
> > Last revision 7Apr2021. This was AP's first published science book.
> >
> > Advisory: This is a difficult book to read and is AP's research log book of the Atom Totality in 2016-2017. I want to keep it for its history value. AP advises all readers wanting to know the Plutonium Atom Totality theory to go to the 9th edition that is the latest up to date account of this theory. The reason AP wants to keep the 8th edition is because of Historical Value, for in this book, while writing it, caused the discovery of the real electron is the muon of atoms. The real proton of atoms is 840MeV and not the 938MeV that most books claim. The particle discovered by JJ Thomson in 1897 thinking he discovered the electron of atoms was actually the Dirac magnetic monopole at 0.5MeV. This discovery changes every, every science that uses atoms and electricity and magnetism, in other words, every science.
> >
> > Foreward:
> > I wrote the 8th edition of Atom Totality and near the end of writing it in 2017, I had my second greatest physics discovery. I learned the real electron of atoms was the muon at 105MeV and not the tiny 0.5MeV particle that J.J.Thomson found in 1897. So I desperately tried to include that discovery in my 8th edition and it is quite plain to see for I tried to write paragraphs after each chapter saying as much. I knew in 2017, that it was a great discovery, changing all the hard sciences, and reframing and restructuring all the hard sciences.
> > Length: 632 pages
> >
> >
> > Product details
> > File Size: 1132 KB
> > Print Length: 632 pages
> > Publication Date: March 11, 2019
> 
> > | /
> > | /
> > |/______ x
> >
> > More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
> >
> > In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
> >
> > I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
> >
> > There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
> >
> > Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> > Archimedes Plutonium
> >
> >
> >
> > #2-1, 137th published book
> >
> > Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> >
> >
> > #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
> >
> > This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
> >
> > Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
> >
> > Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> > And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> > Length: 64 pages
> >
> > Product details
> > • File Size : 790 KB
> > • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > • Print Length : 64 pages
> > • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Language: : English
> > • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> > ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
> >
> > #2-2, 145th published book
> >
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> > • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> > • Language: : English
> > • File size : 682 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> > • Screen Reader : Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> > • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise : Enabled
> > • Print length : 78 pages
> > • Lending : Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> > ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
> >
> > #2-3, 146th published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> > Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> > ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
> >
> >
> > #2-4, 151st published book
> >
> > TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> > Kindle Edition
> > by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
> >
> > Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
> >
> > Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
> >
> > Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
> >
> > Product details
> > • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> > • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> > • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> > • File size ‏ : ‎ 1033 KB
> > • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> > • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> > • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> > • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> > • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > y z
> > | /
> > | /
> > |/______ x
> >
> > More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
> >
> > In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
> >
> > I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
> >
> > There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
> >
> > Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> > Archimedes Plutonium

🪱 of Math and 🐍 of Physics Archimedes "Drag Queen of Math" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:

> 2- The four lunatics of reddit/math,

1) Ludwig Hansen
2) Ludwig van Ludvig
3) Ludwig Plutonium
4) Archimedes Plutonium

Michael Moroney wrote:

> 🪱 of Math and 🐍 of Physics Archimedes "Drag Queen of Math" Plutonium
> <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:
> > 2- The four lunatics of reddit/math,
>
> 1) Ludwig Hansen 2) Ludwig van Ludvig

you are Doreen Pfaffenbach.