When will USA colleges and Universities teach a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, asks the USA stalker Kibo Parry M. with his paid for 28 years stalking who cannot even do a proper correct percentage with his 938 is 12% short of 945. But this is the type of math that Jill Pipher's AMS publishes that 938 is 12% short of 945 and Jill's AMS never heard of the idea that calculus was geometry, therefore a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus was Required.

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.

So, what is keeping Jill's AMS from doing a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus for AP gave one as far back as 2015 and here it is 6 years later and Jill's AMS not even aware that Calculus is geometry. Is it perhaps because Jill's AMS wants to rake in the money of textbooks that have only a "limit analysis fake proof" and not a valid proof which can only be a geometry proof of FTC? Does it all come down to money for the AMS, and not the truth of science. Apparently yes.

When will Canadian colleges and Universities teach a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus? When will they fix Boole's error of AND truth table is TTTF, not TFFF?? When their chickens and cows come home by themselves??

Mindless Canadian stalker Dan, points to the world's only valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus by AP, discovered in 2015.

On Sunday, June 24, 2018 at 10:52:49 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> But you know nothing about mathematics,

Dan Christensen referring to the fact Dan is so blind in math he thinks 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction.

When you are paid to stalk sci.math, you would say just about anything such as 2 OR 1 = 3 even though you know it is 2 AND 1 = 3 for Boole screwed up the Or with And truth tables. But paid money abandons the truth of science. For stalker Dan, money is more important than science truth.

5th published book

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

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

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

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

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

Length: 72 pages

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

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



2> Dan why is Jill Pipher and AMS never doing a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus? Do they not know what geometry is? And is the American Mathematical Society look for presidents who cannot do a geometry proof of FTC only some piddly limit analysis hornswaggle?
> On Friday, November 15, 2019 at 11:01:13 AM UTC-6, Dan Christensen wrote:
> > WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of

>
> 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.
>
1> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
2> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
3> Archimedes Plutonium