On Friday, November 26, 2021 at 1:19:09 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> You are lying again you lying sack of shit!
>
> None of that ever happened and you just make it up to try doing an ad hominem and make people question my knowledge!
>
> You are a liar, a despicable lying cunt.
>
> I can prove anything your stupid brain know about mathematics because you know NOTHING BUT TRIVIAL THINGS!

AP writes: I would never say that about Drs Hennrich, Ohlsson or Crutzen and especially the King of Sweden. Does Sweden have no training manners or etiquette, or is it the harsh winters that depresses the "little lad Zelos Malum"? to speak so offensively towards everyone.

Zelos, I know High School kids that can do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof, but not the Sweden Zelos Malum who boasts about having a Masters in mathematics yet cannot do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof. I bet Drs. Hennrich, Ohlsson Crutzen can do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof in their sleep.

fredag 26 november 2021 kl. 08:31:07 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> On Friday, November 26, 2021 at 1:19:09 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > You are lying again you lying sack of shit!
> >
> > None of that ever happened and you just make it up to try doing an ad hominem and make people question my knowledge!
> >
> > You are a liar, a despicable lying cunt.
> >
> > I can prove anything your stupid brain know about mathematics because you know NOTHING BUT TRIVIAL THINGS!
>
> AP writes: I would never say that about Drs Hennrich, Ohlsson or Crutzen and especially the King of Sweden. Does Sweden have no training manners or etiquette, or is it the harsh winters that depresses the "little lad Zelos Malum"? to speak so offensively towards everyone.
>
> Zelos, I know High School kids that can do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof, but not the Sweden Zelos Malum who boasts about having a Masters in mathematics yet cannot do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof. I bet Drs. Hennrich, Ohlsson Crutzen can do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof in their sleep.

I call you a despicable lying cunt because you are one. You lie and make up stories about me because I know mathematics better than you.

On Friday, November 26, 2021 at 3:37:30 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
>seem to think that the infinitude of primes is such a big deal but it is extremely trivial, and you think I do not have a masters in mathematics. So let's have a challenge!
>
> and because you seem to know SOOOOO much, you won't be needing links to help you, now will you? This is very easy to prove, but can you? :)
>
> Prove that a Galois field of order n exists if and only if n is a prime power

Zelos Malum says no one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor can anyone in Sweden admit that the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse. I guess Sweden is in a sorry sorry state. Maybe their education ministry needs some overhauling.

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

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)

måndag 29 november 2021 kl. 07:15:32 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> On Friday, November 26, 2021 at 3:37:30 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> >seem to think that the infinitude of primes is such a big deal but it is extremely trivial, and you think I do not have a masters in mathematics. So let's have a challenge!
> >
> > and because you seem to know SOOOOO much, you won't be needing links to help you, now will you? This is very easy to prove, but can you? :)
> >
> > Prove that a Galois field of order n exists if and only if n is a prime power
>
> Zelos Malum says no one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor can anyone in Sweden admit that the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse. I guess Sweden is in a sorry sorry state. Maybe their education ministry needs some overhauling.
>
>
> 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
> 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)

Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?

Zelos says no-one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor correct themselves that a slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.

On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 1:10:54 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?

On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 11:25:17 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> cancer is only applicable in a multicellular lifeform because when its single celled....it is considered just reproduction.

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?

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)

onsdag 1 december 2021 kl. 06:45:35 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> Zelos says no-one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor correct themselves that a slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.
> On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 1:10:54 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?
> On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 11:25:17 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > cancer is only applicable in a multicellular lifeform because when its single celled....it is considered just reproduction.
>
> 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?
>
> 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)
comes from the lying sack of shit that makes up stories to slander people :)

Hurray, Uppsala Univ xmas gift to Malum ( I think?) is a monogrammed T-shirt saying in English-- I fail to do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof-- just scared to death of it.

Will you be wearing it in classrooms where you brainwash and foul mouth young students, Zelos?? Maybe Konyberg can help you, for he is just right next door there in Norway.

> > Zelos says no-one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor correct themselves that a slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.
> > On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 1:10:54 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?
> > On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 11:25:17 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > cancer is only applicable in a multicellular lifeform because when its single celled....it is considered just reproduction.
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > 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)
> comes from the lying sack of shit that makes up stories to slander people :)

onsdag 1 december 2021 kl. 07:54:45 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> Hurray, Uppsala Univ xmas gift to Malum ( I think?) is a monogrammed T-shirt saying in English-- I fail to do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof-- just scared to death of it.
>
> Will you be wearing it in classrooms where you brainwash and foul mouth young students, Zelos?? Maybe Konyberg can help you, for he is just right next door there in Norway.
> > > Zelos says no-one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor correct themselves that a slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.
> > > On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 1:10:54 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?
> > > On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 11:25:17 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > cancer is only applicable in a multicellular lifeform because when its single celled....it is considered just reproduction.
> > >
> > > 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?
> > >
> > > 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)
> > comes from the lying sack of shit that makes up stories to slander people :)
Liar liar pants on fire :)

You are lying yet again! Do you feel good knowing you lie?

On 12/1/2021 3:08 AM, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> onsdag 1 december 2021 kl. 07:54:45 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
>> Hurray, Uppsala Univ xmas gift to Malum ( I think?) is a monogrammed T-shirt saying in English-- I fail to do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof-- just scared to death of it.
>>
>> Will you be wearing it in classrooms where you brainwash and foul mouth young students, Zelos?? Maybe Konyberg can help you, for he is just right next door there in Norway.
>>>> Zelos says no-one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor correct themselves that a slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.
>>>> On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 1:10:54 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?
>>>> On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 11:25:17 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> cancer is only applicable in a multicellular lifeform because when its single celled....it is considered just reproduction.
>>>>
>>>> 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?
>>>>
>>>> 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)
>>> comes from the lying sack of shit that makes up stories to slander people :)
> Liar liar pants on fire :)
>
> You are lying yet again! Do you feel good knowing you lie?
>
It's truly bizarre that you complain that AP makes up lies about you, so
what does he do? Make up yet another lie about you! AP appears to have
lost it, big time. Must be his 'arthritis of the brain'.

onsdag 1 december 2021 kl. 09:57:20 UTC+1 skrev Michael Moroney:
> On 12/1/2021 3:08 AM, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > onsdag 1 december 2021 kl. 07:54:45 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> >> Hurray, Uppsala Univ xmas gift to Malum ( I think?) is a monogrammed T-shirt saying in English-- I fail to do a Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof-- just scared to death of it.
> >>
> >> Will you be wearing it in classrooms where you brainwash and foul mouth young students, Zelos?? Maybe Konyberg can help you, for he is just right next door there in Norway.
> >>>> Zelos says no-one in Sweden can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor correct themselves that a slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.
> >>>> On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 1:10:54 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> Whats the matter, idiot, too difficult for you to prove?
> >>>> On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 11:25:17 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> cancer is only applicable in a multicellular lifeform because when its single celled....it is considered just reproduction.
> >>>>
> >>>> 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?
> >>>>
> >>>> 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)
> >>> comes from the lying sack of shit that makes up stories to slander people :)
> > Liar liar pants on fire :)
> >
> > You are lying yet again! Do you feel good knowing you lie?
> >
> It's truly bizarre that you complain that AP makes up lies about you, so
> what does he do? Make up yet another lie about you! AP appears to have
> lost it, big time. Must be his 'arthritis of the brain'.
I call him out cause it is hilarious

Zelos Malum spam for 9Dec
mitchr...@gmail.com
, …
zelos...@gmail.com
12
unread,
Adding .9 repeating and the infinitely small gives 1
torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 20:32:56 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > On Wednesday, December 8,
11:18 PM

mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
mitchr...@gmail.com
,
zelos...@gmail.com
2 unread,
The liar lies and it is not me...
torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 21:37:04 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > The truth is meant to be
11:17 PM

mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
mitchr...@gmail.com
, …
zelos...@gmail.com
7 unread,
Where did galaxies come from after the BB?
torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 20:25:41 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > On Wednesday, December 8,
11:16 PM

mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
mitchr...@gmail.com
, …
zelos...@gmail.com
7 unread,
Infinity minus 1
torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 20:28:41 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > 1-0..999 repeating gives
11:16 PM

pva...@yahoo.com's profile photo
pva...@yahoo.com
,
zelos...@gmail.com
2 unread,
Light Traveling Slower Than the Speed of Light (in Vacuum)
fredag 10 december 2021 kl. 00:01:03 UTC+1 skrev pva...@yahoo.com: > "Physicists manage to
11:16 PM


fredag 10 december 2021 kl. 06:21:08 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> Zelos Malum spam for 9Dec
> mitchr...@gmail.com
> , …
> zelos...@gmail.com
> 12
> unread,
> Adding .9 repeating and the infinitely small gives 1
> torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 20:32:56 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > On Wednesday, December 8,
> 11:18 PM
> 
> mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
> mitchr...@gmail.com
> ,
> zelos...@gmail.com
> 2
> unread,
> The liar lies and it is not me...
> torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 21:37:04 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > The truth is meant to be
> 11:17 PM
> 
> mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
> mitchr...@gmail.com
> , …
> zelos...@gmail.com
> 7
> unread,
> Where did galaxies come from after the BB?
> torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 20:25:41 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > On Wednesday, December 8,
> 11:16 PM
> 
> mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
> mitchr...@gmail.com
> , …
> zelos...@gmail.com
> 7
> unread,
> Infinity minus 1
> torsdag 9 december 2021 kl. 20:28:41 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com: > 1-0.999 repeating gives
> 11:16 PM
> 
> pva...@yahoo.com's profile photo
> pva...@yahoo.com
> ,
> zelos...@gmail.com
> 2
> unread,
> Light Traveling Slower Than the Speed of Light (in Vacuum)
> fredag 10 december 2021 kl. 00:01:03 UTC+1 skrev pva...@yahoo.com: > "Physicists manage to
> 11:16 PM
> 
still unable to meet the challange? What a surprise that you are too stupid! :)