SCI.MATH FAQ, 5Aug2021// Usenet science dead, but AP's newsgroup up and running-- today's topics-- 6 EM laws replacing Maxwell Equations// beetle that walks on underside of water surface// Jupiter elements imply Dirac new radioactivity, not the Nebular Dust Cloud.

Reading the latest Science News, 31July2021 is a shocking surprise of a animal beetle that walks underwater, upside down upon the underside surface. Like putting a water strider backwards and walking underwater.

What an article like this tells me, is how very very important it is to save all species from extinction. For someday we need to be able to engineer something that walks upside down on underwater. And we can reasonably say that if life on Earth had no frogs or electric fish like electric eels, we probably would not have electrical society we have today. We probably would be in a time, still, where there was no electrical power. So dependent are we in learning from plants and animals in Nature how to create new things. And this is so important if the Sun has gone Red Giant and we have to move off to Europa and Ganymede just to continue to live. So it is going to be the diversity of life that saves us from extinction by the Sun gone Red Giant..

Another article in that same Science News is talking about the abundance of nitrogen, argon, krypton and xenon on Jupiter and not the Sun. And how astronomers and physicists are making this hoky and preposterous, daffy and silly explanations. When the answer is straightforward and simple. The birth of new elements in the Universe is not through fusion and Nebular Dust Cloud accretion, rather instead, it is via Faraday law and is growing new elements from old elements as we speak in every mass. Dirac called it "new radioactivity". So here is a case where scientists remain true and loyal to old dumb ideas, and have to extend new data with those old dumb ideas that are false. And the extension causes the ideas to be even more dumb and pitiful. Logic is terribly lacking in most scientists.

For details see:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet in AP's newsgroup, for sci.physics and sci.math was sold by USA govt to a gang of stalkers, who pester everyone as they now own sci.physics, and the USA govt of NSF and dept of Educ probably laughing their arse off as the stalkers harass and pester everyone. In the 1980s we had fraud waste abuse of $900. toilet seats from the government. The govt learns quickly and now their fraud waste and abuse is pay Kibo Parry M, Jan Burse, Dan Christensen perhaps $100 per stalker post, providing everyone in USA govt entertainment in their soda coffee break at Washington DC. "Look, kibo just harassed AP with two more emoji's of "shit for brains". The Master in Dr. Who: ha ha ha,... ha ha ha....

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe

Sci. Math FAQ history

From 1993 onwards to sometime around 1996 SCI.MATH FAQs were admininstered by Univ Waterloo in Canada, warning young students and newcomers of what to expect in sci.math. It worked well. And I would have liked it to be the first post permanently in sci.math. And it was done "for free".

But then corruption and fraud entered sci.math and sci.physics, for when money can be made from something, easy money, then it is not long before a new arrangement is made. So instead of a "for free FAQ". Some persons convinced the USA govt to pay stalkers to go around and pester authors 24-7-365.

And here is where a awful choice was likely made. A choice of hiring Kibo Parry M. of World std as noted by Wikipedia reference to the NSF, National Science Foundation. That they likely (we need investigative journalist to unearth the facts) hired Kibo Parry M, not knowing or not caring that he was Gay (we have to prove this) and by hiring him to stalk Usenet sci.math and sci.physics, he brings along with him (unknown to NSF at the time) brings along with him a army of gay followers. So as they hire Kibo Parry M to stalk AP, then AP is not a one on one with Kibo attacks, no, AP is faced with a army of Kibo mannequins with no brains and all bad mouth, as seen in this recent exchange. And hopefully this eye-witness testimony will win in Judge Judy's courtroom if it comes to that.

So, David, are you Gay and a member of the gang of 12 or want to join the gang by attacking AP.



On Wednesday, August 4, 2021 at 6:34:54 PM UTC-5, david...@gmail.com wrote:
> It seems that Archimedes Plutonium has written something like 175 books in the past two years. I'm sure that most of them are of top quality, but one needs to be retracted.
>
> He wrote a book in which he claims to prove experimentally that conic sections are never ellipses, but rather they're ovals. I'm claiming that he didn't do the experiments precisely enough.
>
> Here's how to do the experiment more precisely.
>
> First, use the flashlight on a smartphone. I'm think that all such phones have a flashlight consisting of a single bright LED, and that will serve as a very good approximation of a point sourse of light.
>
> Then, take a piece of cardboard--I recommend about 18"X18"--and precisely cut a round hole in the center about 5" in diameter.
>
> Then, in a darkened room, hold the flash light about 18" behind the sheet of cardboard, which will project a cone of light. Then project that cone of light onto a wall. The angle at which it is projected can be varied as desired.
>
> Then, so I claim, it will be visually obvious that the light cone will always intersect the plane of the wall in an ellipse (or a parabola, or a hyperbola, depending on the angle). And that will prove that Archimedes Plutonium is wrong when he says that ellipses are not conic sections.
>
> Just this once, he's going to have to admit that he has made a mistake. But maybe he's afraid to do the experiment?

So, is this David, a new kid on the block, or a old one with a nymchange, is he gay and just arrived at the Gay Pick Up Bar of sci.math. Of course, the truth of math and logic are nowhere to be seen in his scree, much like Zelos Malum, who when asked to do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus replied-- "> why would one need to do it geometrically?. Duh, ... because calculus is geometry.

So is David wanting to ply gay sex toys in sci.math, with a iphone light, fetish toy if a penis prick is oval or ellipse, proving once again, if Dan Christensen's brain were MRI-ed nothing but penis cock would fly out.

Dan, question: seriously, are Gay stalkers worse than Heterosexual stalkers? Are there proportionally more gay stalkers than heterosexual stalkers? The data from Usenet suggests Gay stalkers are proportionally more numerous and their persistence is more obnoxious. Part of the skew in numbers would be that there are more gay men than gay women.

Take for example Zelos here, every night a scree of spam on John Gabriel, signaling to John a pining for his dick, and forget about New Calculus.

Every night a spam scree by Zelos, of 1 sentence replies to John Gabriel, not for any math but to bury all the other posts onto the 2nd page.

So, is Zelos and John Gabriel gay? And is sci.math for them, some sort of pick up bar.

Is this why Kibo Parry, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Franz, and the gang of 12, see sci.math not as a forum of math, but as a gay bar counter pickup station. And why they argue for 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction a screw up of Boole logic, why the continue to want to keep the screw up in schools and education, because Boole himself may have been gay, and the image of a penis cock in the mouth or a bedwarmer is more important to Franz and his gang of gays than ever is the truth of math, logic or science.

So, Zelos, and Gabriel, are you gay lovers and this is how you use sci.math, as some daily pick up bar.

And where 1 attacks AP, even if the statement was --" the sky is blue" all 12 of the gang of 12 attack AP, for fear of missing a cock penis inserted in the rear. Is that why Jan Burse and Dan Christensen roam through sci.math daily-- cruising for penis-cock, and math is just foreplay. And when AP says the slant cut of cone is the Oval, never the Ellipse, conjures up images of John Gabriel's dick inserted in Dan Christensen's ear drum. While talking about penises forever in a Chris Thomasson fractal.

On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 7:18:40 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote in sci.math:
sex motivation in science Re: curious, just curious-- is there a numbers correlation between percentage of stalkers and homosexuality? Re: Psychology behind the mental disorder of stalking-- Michael Moroney, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Jan Bielawski

On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 5:21:29 PM UTC-5, Me(Franz) wrote:
> On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 11:31:26 PM UTC+2, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
>> I am not suggesting that the 12 stalkers are 12 homosexuals.
(Franz) > I am not suggesting that the 12 stalkers are 12 [male --me] homosexuals.
>
(Franz)> I'm sure they are. That's why they are called /12 Angry Men/!

Well, this explains a lot about many posters in sci.math and sci.physics, for they are not in science for truth but in science to meet and partner up. And explains the loyalty and ferocity of hate posts by those 12, having no truth value. Explains why Franz keeps posting a total fake ellipse, because of his bedwarmer approval.

In another thread I discuss how "money corrupts science" but looking here, I need to consider how sex orientation corrupts the truth of science. So that we must ask-- is black hole acceptance due in large part to homosexual community wanting a black hole agenda. Is the Big Bang theory a homosexual favorite. Is the Appel & Haken in 4 color mapping, the Hales Kepler Packing, the Wiles FLT, all due to homosexual community favoritism, rather than any truth content.