On Tuesday, August 31, 2021 at 4:45:49 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> AP has a bit of problem here distinguishing between Ampere and Coulomb. And of course Old Physics never ever tried to distinguish them and leaving them as only that of C = A*seconds.
>
>
> --- quoting H&R ---
> Appendix A, quoting "Electric current, Ampere, A = ...that constant current which, if maintained in two straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible circular cross section, and placed 1 meter apart in vacuum, would produce between these conductors a force equal to 2*10^-7 newton per meter of length." (1946)
> --- end quote ---
>
> A newton is force of mass times acceleration, F= m*a.
>
> These definitions gives the elementary magnetic monopole = 1.618*10^-19 C
>
> So when you say Coulombs, you are referring to a quantity of electricity as hoola hoops moving by in 1 second of time. When you say Ampere, you are talking about the number of magnetic monopole in a hoola hoop, you are talking about particles of magnetic monopoles that sum up or total with rest mass 0.5MeV as electric current.
>
> This is how we get rid of "charge" altogether. In Old Physics charge was seen as some characteristic of particles, a feature trait of masses, a property of masses, but not a separate particle itself. In New Physics, charge is a particle (or wave) called magnetic monopole.
>
> New Physics makes "charge" be an actual physical entity of either particle or wave, and that particle composes electricity, electric current, and that particle is the magnetic monopole. Old Physics had "charge" always be a feature of particles, a property, but not a particle itself. In this viewpoint of Old Physics "charge" had no physical reality, and only a property of mass.
>
> Now the above was defined in 1946 and recently in 2019, it was redefined further.
>
> And here we have to analyze deeply these two equations of physics units. Very important equations are these two for they were obfuscation in Old Physics.
>
> Ampere = Coulomb/seconds
>
> Coulomb = Ampere*seconds
>
> The definition of Ampere above as seen in Wikipedia and in all physics textbooks does not make these two equations clear and plain to understand, and the simple reason for that obfuscation is that Old Physics had no magnetic monopole, for their Gauss's law in Maxwell Equations forbids magnetic monopole.
>
> How is the best way to explain the above two definitions? For Ampere is the current, while Coulomb is the quantity of current.
>
> A metaphor analogy serves best here to teach this amazingly difficult concept of Ampere versus Coulomb.
>
> And the best metaphor I can use is a road with a lot of traffic, say the expressway and you have a reference point where you watch the cars going in one direction. But now, let us say all vehicles are cars and all the cars are in groups of a wave, a troop of Navy cars all colored blue and going down the expressway in a orderly sortie in a single wave. Next a troop of Army cars all colored green and bunched together as a unison wave. Next a troop of Air Force cars in a wave colored white, and next a troop of Marines cars in a wave colored red. And say the expressway has 4 lanes so that all 4 lanes can be taken by all 4 of the forces where in lane 1 is Navy, in 2 is Army, in 3 is Air Force and in 4 is Marines all going by our reference point at the same time.
>
> So the Ampere current is a counting of each car that goes past the reference point.
>
> While the Coulomb is a counting of not only each car, but the entire 4 waves of cars going past the reference point.
>

Now I am trying to think of another place in physics or other science where they define something as similar to Ampere and Coulomb.

Where they end up with equations:

Y = A*seconds

A = Y/seconds, or a frequency of Y

Which reminds me of Plancks radiation formula of Energy = Planck's constant times frequency.

So here, I may have stumbled on the beautiful connection between electricity and quantum mechanics. A fact not known or understood before these writings by AP.

That electricity with definitions of Ampere and Coulomb are directly related to Planck's quantum mechanics.

In this manner, then, either Ampere or Coulomb is seen as a Quantum Mechanics constant.

But are there other examples in science that have the above math relationship.

Y = A*seconds

A = Y/seconds

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

On Tuesday, August 31, 2021 at 5:10:00 PM UTC-5 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
On Tuesday, August 31, 2021 at 4:45:49 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> AP has a bit of problem here distinguishing between Ampere and Coulomb. And of course Old Physics never ever tried to distinguish them and leaving them as only that of C = A*seconds.
>
>
> --- quoting H&R ---
> Appendix A, quoting "Electric current, Ampere, A = ...that constant current which, if maintained in two straight parallel conductors of infinite length, of negligible circular cross section, and placed 1 meter apart in vacuum, would produce between these conductors a force equal to 2*10^-7 newton per meter of length." (1946)
> --- end quote ---
>
> A newton is force of mass times acceleration, F= m*a.
>
> These definitions gives the elementary magnetic monopole = 1.618*10^-19 C
>
> So when you say Coulombs, you are referring to a quantity of electricity as hoola hoops moving by in 1 second of time. When you say Ampere, you are talking about the number of magnetic monopole in a hoola hoop, you are talking about particles of magnetic monopoles that sum up or total with rest mass 0.5MeV as electric current.
>
> This is how we get rid of "charge" altogether. In Old Physics charge was seen as some characteristic of particles, a feature trait of masses, a property of masses, but not a separate particle itself. In New Physics, charge is a particle (or wave) called magnetic monopole.
>
> New Physics makes "charge" be an actual physical entity of either particle or wave, and that particle composes electricity, electric current, and that particle is the magnetic monopole. Old Physics had "charge" always be a feature of particles, a property, but not a particle itself. In this viewpoint of Old Physics "charge" had no physical reality, and only a property of mass.
>
> Now the above was defined in 1946 and recently in 2019, it was redefined further.
>
> And here we have to analyze deeply these two equations of physics units. Very important equations are these two for they were obfuscation in Old Physics.
>
> Ampere = Coulomb/seconds
>
> Coulomb = Ampere*seconds
>
> The definition of Ampere above as seen in Wikipedia and in all physics textbooks does not make these two equations clear and plain to understand, and the simple reason for that obfuscation is that Old Physics had no magnetic monopole, for their Gauss's law in Maxwell Equations forbids magnetic monopole.
>
> How is the best way to explain the above two definitions? For Ampere is the current, while Coulomb is the quantity of current.
>
> A metaphor analogy serves best here to teach this amazingly difficult concept of Ampere versus Coulomb.
>
> And the best metaphor I can use is a road with a lot of traffic, say the expressway and you have a reference point where you watch the cars going in one direction. But now, let us say all vehicles are cars and all the cars are in groups of a wave, a troop of Navy cars all colored blue and going down the expressway in a orderly sortie in a single wave. Next a troop of Army cars all colored green and bunched together as a unison wave. Next a troop of Air Force cars in a wave colored white, and next a troop of Marines cars in a wave colored red. And say the expressway has 4 lanes so that all 4 lanes can be taken by all 4 of the forces where in lane 1 is Navy, in 2 is Army, in 3 is Air Force and in 4 is Marines all going by our reference point at the same time.
>
> So the Ampere current is a counting of each car that goes past the reference point.
>
> While the Coulomb is a counting of not only each car, but the entire 4 waves of cars going past the reference point.
>

Now I am trying to think of another place in physics or other science where they define something as similar to Ampere and Coulomb.

Where they end up with equations:

Y = A*seconds

A = Y/seconds, or a frequency of Y

Which reminds me of Plancks radiation formula of Energy = Planck's constant times frequency.

So here, I may have stumbled on the beautiful connection between electricity and quantum mechanics. A fact not known or understood before these writings by AP.

That electricity with definitions of Ampere and Coulomb are directly related to Planck's quantum mechanics.

In this manner, then, either Ampere or Coulomb is seen as a Quantum Mechanics constant.

But are there other examples in science that have the above math relationship.

Y = A*seconds

A = Y/seconds

Alright, I am looking at Planck's constant again 6.582*10^-16 eV*seconds

And looking at elementary Coulomb = 1.618 *10^-19 C

The phi, the golden ratio in mathematics is 1.618... and when we divide it into 1 we have 0.618

How close in sigma error is 6.58 with 6.18 ? We have 6.58/6.18 = 6% sigma error, unacceptable, for the moment. Because it was seen earlier that if we take the speed of light to be really that of 3.16*10^8 meters/second rather than 3*10^8 m/s we have a sigma error of 5%.

So what we likely have is that speed of light, Planck's constant, Mole or Avogadro's number, and the Elementary Coulomb are all related and have their prefix number value that of the golden mean 1.618...

And, even speed of light 3.16 prefix, if we take 1.618 x 2 = 3.2 and 3.2/3.1 = sigma error of 3%. Why multiply by 2? Well, the real pi when using radius of circle is not 3.14... but is 6.28... when using radius. The 3.14 is only used for diameter of circle.

What this discovery of the Ampere versus Coulomb means is that it paves the way to realizing that electricity and light waves are one and the same thing and where we have the EM Spectrum of radio waves to infrared to visible to ultraviolet to X-rays to gamma rays that we need a place for electricity in that EM Spectrum. For the Ampere is a Coulomb X frequency.

Where would electricity lie in the existing EM Spectrum? I would say right about where you have 1MeV gamma rays is the EM spectrum of Electricity.

So, well, looks like AP is going to alter and change the EM Spectrum.

AP
King of Science, especially Physics

🕷 of Math and 🦂 of Physics Archimedes "science hater" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:
>
> AP has a bit of problem here distinguishing between Ampere and Coulomb.
....
> How is the best way to explain the above two definitions? For Ampere is the current, while Coulomb is the quantity of current.
>
> A metaphor analogy serves best here to teach this amazingly difficult concept of Ampere versus Coulomb.

"Amazingly difficult concept"?

No "king of science" here! Hahahahaha!!!

Since you don't even know Ohm's Law, I guess expecting you to understand
the difference between an ampere and a coulomb is too much to ask.

<snip bizarre metaphor>

> Alright, I am looking at Planck's constant again 6.582*10^-16 eV*seconds
>
> And looking at elementary Coulomb = 1.618 *10^-19 C
>
> The phi, the golden ratio in mathematics is 1.618... and when we divide it into 1 we have 0.618
>
> How close in sigma error is 6.58 with 6.18 ? We have 6.58/6.18 = 6% sigma error, unacceptable, for the moment. Because it was seen earlier that if we take the speed of light to be really that of 3.16*10^8 meters/second rather than 3*10^8 m/s we have a sigma error of 5%.
>
> So what we likely have is that speed of light, Planck's constant, Mole or Avogadro's number, and the Elementary Coulomb are all related and have their prefix number value that of the golden mean 1.618...
>
> And, even speed of light 3.16 prefix, if we take 1.618 x 2 = 3.2 and 3.2/3.1 = sigma error of 3%. Why multiply by 2? Well, the real pi when using radius of circle is not 3.14... but is 6.28... when using radius. The 3.14 is only used for diameter of circle.

Wow! Enough fudge factors here to open up a little fudge shop!
>
> Where would electricity lie in the existing EM Spectrum? I would say right about where you have 1MeV gamma rays is the EM spectrum of Electricity.
>
> So, well, looks like AP is going to alter and change the EM Spectrum.

Only in your mind. The rest of the world will continue without you.
>
> AP
> Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics
>
>
>
>

Princeton Univ using exclusively TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, says kibo Parry M who has Volume 1 almost memorized.

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)

Books in this series are.
Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS High School junior year, book 2
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS High School senior year, book 3
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS 1st year college, book 4
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS Sophomore college, book 5
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS Junior college, book 6
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS Senior college, book 7

Preface: 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.

Product details
• ASIN : B08RK33T8V
• Publication date : December 28, 2020
• Language: : English
• File size : 917 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 114 pages
• Lending : Enabled

#3-1, 2nd published book

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

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of 0.5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is everywhere.

Cover picture: shows 3 isomers of CO2 and the O2 molecule.

Length: 1150 pages

Product details
• File Size : 2167 KB
• ASIN : B07PLVMMSZ
• Publication Date : March 11, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 1150 pages
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,212 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#181 in General Chemistry & Reference
#1324 in General Chemistry
#1656 in Physics (Kindle Store)

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

On Wednesday, September 1, 2021 at 11:56:49 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🧟‍♂️ Peter Constantin Professor of Mathematics and Director of PACM of Math and 👻 Michael Aizenman William Browder, Otis Chodosh Veblen, Maria Chudnovsky
of Physics "Putin's Stooge" Weinan E, Charles Fefferman> blithered:

AP writes: my paper shredder puts the 28 year nonstop stalker Kibo Parry M posts in and out comes these shredder posts

> "Amazingly difficult concept"?
>
> No "king of science" here! Hahahahaha!!!
>
> Since Edward Witten don't even know Ohm's Law, I guess expecting you to understand
> the difference between an ampere and a coulomb is too much to ask.
>
> <snip bizarre metaphor>

🧛🏻‍♂️ of Math and 👻 of Physics Archimedes "math hater" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:
> Princeton Univ using exclusively TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, kooks mentally ill Archimedes Plutonium

That's a real stoopid thing to say, ArchiePoo!
>
>
> 137th published book
>
> Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
WARNING TO STUDENTS, PARENTS and TEACHERS: Archimedes Plutonium is
offering to teach your children his broken physics and math. BEWARE! He
will corrupt the minds of your children! Mr. Plutonium is not content to
be a failure of math and physics all by himself. He wants everyone else
to fail as well! He teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as atoms
contain the unstable muon, the ellipse isn't a conic section, that there
are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine wave isn't
sinusoidal but semicircles, cycloids or parabolas (depending on his
mood), plus many, many other instances of bad math and physics.

Plutonium has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books
on Usenet. That has failed until now, perhaps in part due to the fact
Usenet is an old, dying medium few modern students even know of, much
less use. However, Mr. Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing
his dangerous books for free on Kindle. This has greatly increased the
danger to our students!

One of his dangerous tricks is teach false Boolean logic such as 10 AND 2
= 12. His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a
false statement that nobody believes, such as 10 OR 2 = 12, say that it
is false (which it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another
similar false statement such as 10 AND 2 = 12, in order to really confuse
future computer scientists. Plutonium is taking advantage of the fact
that AND means different things in Boolean logic and elementary
arithmetic, as AND is an informal synonym for plus/addition. It is
important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by modern computers, 10 OR 2 = 10 and 10 AND 2 = 2. Of
course in pure Boolean logic the only possible values are true and false
(1 or 0), so in pure Boolean logic the statements "10 AND 2" and "10 OR
2" don't even make sense. Don't let evil Plutonium's bad logic confuse
you!

Additionally, Plutonium has started a Cult of Failure. He is trying to
convince students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of
failure. This cult is anti-science and anti-mathematics. Its only goal is
to promote failure in math and science.

Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like this.
Perhaps he is envious of their potential success, which he never had
because he is a failure at math and science. Plutonium is not content to
be a failure at math and physics all by himself. He wants everyone to
fail as well. Some claim he is an agent of China, in order for them to
dominate the world economy. Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of North
Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
previously attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new,
true mathematics" in an attempt to destroy mathematics. But the point is,
stay away, if he offers to give or sell you his dangerous books.
Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise
legitimate Amazon.