Univ Western Ontario rated top science-bigot school in Canada by Dan Christensen
On Sunday, September 26, 2021 at 12:03:10 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of

                              ..
            .- " `-.   ,..-'''  ```.....'`-..
           ,      . `.'            '        `.
         .'   .' `    `           '   `..     ;
         .   ;  .'                     . `.    ;
         ;   . '                       `.  .   '
          . '                            ` `.  |
        . '.                                  '
       .          0              0            ' `.
      '                                          `
     ;                                            `
    .'                                             `
    ;                      U                        `
    ;    ';                                         `
    :   | ;..                                 :`     `
    :    `;. ```.                           .-; |    '
    '.      `    ``..,                   .'   :'    '
     ;       `        ;'...          ..-''    '     '  I am Christensen,I am such a stupid insane imp of math and logic that I thought a vertex has a derivative, that distinct means not-distinct, and that 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction. And I love spam reading of vvgra and tomato hello, and I am a failure of academics and so I spend most days making out hate-lists of people who actually succeed in science for my pea sized brain is envious and jealous of those who succeed in science yet I failed in science.
      `       `        ;  ````'''""'  ;      '    '
       `       `        ;            ;      '    '
        `       `        ;          ;      '    '
         `       `.       ````''''''      '    '
           `       .                     '    '
         /  `       `.                  '    '        .
        /     `       ..            ..'    .'"""""...'
       /   .`   `       ``.........-'     .'` .....'''
      / .'' ;     `                    .'   `
  ...'.'    ;    .' `                .'      `
   ""      .'  .' |    `           .; \       `
           ; .'   |      `. . . . ' .  \       `
           :'     |     '   `       ,   `.     `
                  |    '     `      '     `.    `
                  `   '       `     ;       `.  |
                  `.'          `    ;         `-'
                                `...'

Dan Christensen on James Leech,> Are you ready, kids??? Bend over, er... > > Dan

On Wednesday, September 29, 2021 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of

On Monday, October 21, 2019 at 1:29:49 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
>
> Are you ready, kids??? Bend over, er...
>
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
> Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

On Monday, October 4, 2021 at 5:19:34 PM UTC-5, Earle Jones wrote:
> On Mon Oct 4 13:58:59 2021 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > add to AP's 5th book SUSPEND ALL COLLEGE LOGIC CLASSES, UNTIL THEY FIX THEIR ERRORS...
> >
> > Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> > Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
> > 12:48 AM (15 hours ago)
> >
> >
> >
> > to Plutonium Atom Universe
> >
> > Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
> > unread,
> > Oct 3, 2021, 6:04:55 PM
> > to Plutonium Atom Universe
> > Archimedes Plutonium
> > Oct 3, 2021, 5:59 PM
> > to sci.math
> >
> > We know all matter is made up of atoms. We know even gases are made up of atoms. So we have only atoms and the void in existence. The Universe itself is both void and atoms. An entity in science contains some atoms.
> >
> > If all entities that exist are composed of atoms, then the Universe itself must be an atom.
> *
> False conclusion.
> *
> If my hamburger is composed of atoms, then my hamburger must be an atom.
>
> earle
> *

Stanford Shithead Jones has a disconnect with Logical Reasoning. A butterfly is composed of many atoms, but a butterfly is not a single-atom.

All matter is made up of atoms.

The Universe has matter, and if not a atom, then there is the exception to the logic that All matter is made up of atoms. Then we cannot say the Atomic Theory "all things are made up of atoms for we have to exclude the Universe."

The fallacy that Jones makes is that his small mind never studied Universal quantifiers of logic, for that arswipe Jones cannot even do a slant cut in cone and understand it is an oval not a ellipse.

Earle Jones the mindless fuckdog of Stanford Univ never studied logic, and could not reason himself out of a paper sack.

LOGIC at play

Atomic Theory is a Universal quantifier of Every thing, every matter is made up of atoms.

The Universe itself is a Universal quantifier.

A hamburger is not a universal, but try telling that to a Stanford anal fuckdog named Jones.

So what is in play is the Universal Physic law of Atomic Theory

And the Universe itself.

So if the Atomic theory is TRUE, which Feynman said in his opening pages of Lectures on Physics. Then when we add the fact that the Universe has matter. We come to a fork in the road.

Is the Atomic Theory Law of physics Universal or does it have an exception.

For the Universe surely is Universal and the Universe certainly has matter.

So anyone with a logic mind not a gay driven hate stalker buttfuck mind of Stanford's Earle Jones.

Can only come to two conclusions. The universe is the exception to the law of Atomic Theory. Or, the Atomic Theory has no exceptions and the Universe itself is just one big atom.

Fuckdogs like Earle Jones can make up any sentence as a excuse-- hamburger or cat or house or Venus or car. But the fuckdog Jones never took Logic, never had a single day in his entire life where he had straight correct thoughts about anything. And a fuckdog like Earle Jones of Stanford could never understand that when AP places Atomic Theory up against the Universe itself, that such is a special relationship of Logic.

Not the fuckdog Jones placing atomic theory up against a hamburger. Earle, go back to sucking a cock as shown in your logo picture.

Stanford University just has no manners, none at all, by letting this crazied shithead Earle Jones constantly peckering away with his criminal stalking on sci.math and sci.physics. When Stanford should get Earle Jones into a psychiatric clinic and placed on medication, as Earle drags himself down along with Stanford University.

AP
King of Science, especially Physics

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

On Monday, October 4, 2021 at 9:26:56 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium (AP) wrote...

AP is a malicious internet troll who wants only to mislead and confuse you. He may not be all there, but his fake math and science can only be meant to promote failure in schools. One can only guess at his motives.

In AP's OWN WORDS here:

“Primes do not exist, because the set they were borne from has no division.”
--June 29, 2020

“The last and largest finite number is 10^604.”
--June 3, 2015

“0 appears to be the last and largest finite number”
--June 9, 2015

“0/0 must be equal to 1.”
-- June 9, 2015

“0 is an infinite irrational number.”
--June 28, 2015

“No negative numbers exist.”
--December 22, 2018

“Rationals are not numbers.”
--May 18, 2019

According to AP's “chess board math,” an equilateral triangle is a right-triangle.
--December 11, 2019

Which could explain...

“The value of sin(45 degrees) = 1.”
--May 31, 2019

AP deliberately and repeatedly presented the truth table for OR as the truth table for AND:

“New Logic
AND
T & T = T
T & F = T
F & T = T
F & F = F”
--November 9, 2019

AP seeks aid of Russian agents to promote failure in schools:

"Please--Asking for help from Russia-- russian robots-- to create a new, true mathematics [sic]"
--November 9, 2017

And if that wasn't weird enough...

“The totality, everything that there is [the universe], is only 1 atom of plutonium [Pu]. There is nothing outside or beyond this one atom of plutonium.”
--April 4, 1994

“The Universe itself is one gigantic big atom.”
--November 14, 2019

AP's sinister Atom God Cult of Failure???

“Since God-Pu is marching on.
Glory! Glory! Atom Plutonium!
Its truth is marching on.
It has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
It is sifting out the hearts of people before its judgment seat;
Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer it; be jubilant, my feet!
Our God-Pu is marching on.”
--December 15, 2018 (Note: Pu is the atomic symbol for plutonium)

Dan

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

Dan Christensen shits in face Arthur B. McDonald, James Leech Queen's University
On Monday, October 4, 2021 at 8:53:30 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of

Kibo Parry M on>John Baez "Village Idiot of UCR
> Marcela Carena> fails completely at physics:
On Thursday, September 30, 2021 at 1:26:15 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🪲 of Math and 🪳 of Physics John Baez "Village Idiot of UCR
> Marcela Carena> fails completely at physics:

AP writes: AP no longer tolerates criminal-stalkers like Dan Christensen, Kibo Parry M and shreds his posts in a shredder and spits them back at him and his paid for stalks-- NSF Dr Panchanathan ???---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 ---

Why is UCR John Baez a failure in math and physics, cannot even take 9 times 105 and see that it is 945? I mean, well, why ever bother with the mindless Weinberg-Glashow-Gell-Mann Standard Model nonsense of physics, as some sort of Algebra, when you cannot do 9x105=945 and interpret it correctly of what you have done in physics.

Much the same problem with Marcela Carena of Fermi Natl. Lab with the excessive muon spin as reported in Scientific American, Oct2021. Not able to ask the most simple and basic question of physics, which is the atom's true real electron is it the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus or is it the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole. No, Marcela Carena and John Baez rather listen to a herd community, rather than practice and do physics with a logical mind-- ask the simple questions and do the logical experiments from those logical questions.

Physics, left up to Baez and his buddies of Weinberg, Glashow, Gell-Mann, Peter Higgs, Ed Witten those buddies are comfortable with a electron at 0.5MeV, proton at 938MeV, neutron at 940MeV and all three of them as "do nothing particles" with the amazing audacity of saying the 0.5MeV particle flys around the outside of a 938MeV proton at nearly the speed of light 99.99% speed of light, yet never flys off. For Baez, and his buddies never understood Angular Momentum. Never could interpret 9 x 105 = 938 or 940 within Sigma Error.

But then along comes AP, and says-- sigma error is important in physics and use it.

AP says-- you cannot have "do nothing particles in physics".

AP says-- the true electron of atoms is the muon and stuck inside a 840MeV proton doing the Faraday law by producing Dirac magnetic monopoles such as the 0.5MeV dipole as electricity.

Is John Baez or Sheldon Glashow or Peter Higgs or Ed Witten still able to learn in science, or are they just complete washed up and washed out. Are they complete wash out failures of physics? Probably complete failures because they cannot even muster the intelligence of dropping a Kerr or Mason lid inside a folded up paper cone and acknowledge something as simple as what a High School student can prove, that a slant cut in cone is a Oval, never the ellipse, (see AP books below). Yet that is what the "pack of fools Baez, Glashow, Higgs, Witten" still teach their electron is 0.5MeV, their ellipse is slant cut in cone, but probably worst of all, these bozos still teach the Boole logic of 2 OR 1= 3 with AND as subtraction. Imagine that, physics professors who cannot even think logically correct, no wonder they are incapable of 9 x 105.

                              ..
            .- " `-.   ,..-'''  ```.....'`-..
           ,      . `.'            '        `.
         .'   .' `    `           '   `..     ;
         .   ;  .'                     . `.    ;
         ;   . '                       `.  .   '
          . '                            ` `.  |
        . '.                                  '
       .          0              0            ' `.
      '                                          `
     ;                                            `
    .'                                             `
    ;                      U                        `
    ;    ';                                         `
    :   | ;..                                 :`     `
    :    `;. ```.                           .-; |    '
    '.      `    ``..,                   .'   :'    '
     ;       `        ;'...          ..-''    '     '  Hi, I am Dan Christensen, who when hearing of AP's proof that slant cut in cone is truly a Oval, never the ellipse, I did the biggest no, no you can ever do in science, for I attacked the man, rather than do the experiment. I bent over backwards to redefine the ellipse in order to deny AP credit of a discovery. For I, Dan feels it more important to suppress the truth in science than to acknowledge the truth, and my brethren Terence Tao, Andrew Wiles, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell seem to all feel the same way-- suppress truth of science and run and hide, hide and run.
      `       `        ;  ````'''""'  ;      '    '
       `       `        ;            ;      '    '
        `       `        ;          ;      '    '
         `       `.       ````''''''      '    '
           `       .                     '    '
         /  `       `.                  '    '        .
        /     `       ..            ..'    .'"""""...'
       /   .`   `       ``.........-'     .'` .....'''
      / .'' ;     `                    .'   `
  ...'.'    ;    .' `                .'      `
   ""      .'  .' |    `           .; \       `
           ; .'   |      `. . . . ' .  \       `
           :'     |     '   `       ,   `.     `
                  |    '     `      '     `.    `
                  `   '       `     ;       `.  |
                  `.'          `    ;         `-'
                                `...'

3rd published book

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

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray: Not Enabled
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

#8-2, 11th published book

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

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

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

On 04.Oct.2021, Dan Christensen wrote:

> AP is a malicious internet troll who wants only to mislead and confuse
> you. He may not be all there, but his fake math and science can only be
> meant to promote failure in schools. One can only guess at his motives.

you capitalists are proven *nonessential_workers* lol, around the world.
You all went bankrupt already. You thought you were big capitalists!!