On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 12:27:16 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
> schmitch...@gmail.com schwrote:
> > On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> >> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> >>> That math is rightly named...
> >>> it is a formula without a solution.
> >>> Because negative one does not
> >>> exist that formula does not...
> >> *
> >> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> >>
> >
> > new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > just subtraction negative with a limit.
> So your "new algebra" is weak, Smitch. You can stuff it into
> your puffy ass. We will keep the stronger real algebra.

Algebra has no negative solutions you moron...

lørdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > That math is rightly named...
> > > it is a formula without a solution.
> > > Because negative one does not
> > > exist that formula does not...
> > *
> > Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> >
> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch
You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
KON

On 11/27/2021 2:31 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 12:27:16 PM UTC-8, Python wrote:
>> schmitch...@gmail.com schwrote:
>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>>> That math is rightly named...
>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
>>>>> Because negative one does not
>>>>> exist that formula does not...
>>>> *
>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
>>>>
>>>
>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>> So your "new algebra" is weak, Smitch. You can stuff it into
>> your puffy ass. We will keep the stronger real algebra.
>
> Algebra has no negative solutions you moron...
>

your monkey DNA has -1 on it.

On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> lørdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > > That math is rightly named...
> > > > it is a formula without a solution.
> > > > Because negative one does not
> > > > exist that formula does not...
> > > *
> > > Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> > >
> > new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > just subtraction negative with a limit.
> >
> > Mitchell Raemsch
> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> KON

AP wants to use my work.
I don't believe in anger. Do you?

Mitchell Raemsch

On 11/27/2021 3:01 PM, konyberg wrote:
> lørdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>> That math is rightly named...
>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
>>>> Because negative one does not
>>>> exist that formula does not...
>>> *
>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
>>>
>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>>
>> Mitchell Raemsch
> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> KON
>

AP is not angry at all, he is generating neo-physics

On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:47:15 PM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> On 11/27/2021 3:01 PM, konyberg wrote:
> > lørdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> >> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> >>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> >>>> That math is rightly named...
> >>>> it is a formula without a solution.
> >>>> Because negative one does not
> >>>> exist that formula does not...
> >>> *
> >>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> >>>
> >> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> >> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> >> just subtraction negative with a limit.
> >>
> >> Mitchell Raemsch
> > You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> > KON
> >
> AP is not angry at all,

Sure he is. It is why he is resentful instead...

On Sat Nov 27 11:51:48 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > That math is rightly named...
> > > it is a formula without a solution.
> > > Because negative one does not
> > > exist that formula does not...
> > *
> > Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> >
>
> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

*
Mitchell: In other words, you do not believe in the Fundamental Theorem of Algebra (Gauss, 1799.)

Is that right?

earle
*

On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> > lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > > On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > > On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > > > That math is rightly named...
> > > > > it is a formula without a solution.
> > > > > Because negative one does not
> > > > > exist that formula does not...
> > > > *
> > > > Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> > > >
> > > new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > > No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > > just subtraction negative with a limit.
> > >
> > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> > KON
>
> AP wants to use my work.
> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
>
> Mitchell Raemsch

*
Mitchell:

I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.

You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.

You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?

earle
*

On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
> On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
>>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
>>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>>>> That math is rightly named...
>>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
>>>>>> Because negative one does not
>>>>>> exist that formula does not...
>>>>> *
>>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
>>>>>
>>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
>>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
>>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>>>>
>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
>>> KON
>>
>> AP wants to use my work.
>> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
>>
>> Mitchell Raemsch
>
> *
> Mitchell:
>
> I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
>
> You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
>
> You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
>
> earle
> *
>
>

I think it is a fabulous idea! Just think of what they could do! Amazing Math!
They should also invite that sciencie guy James McGinn in sci.physics who knows as much math as his missing water vapor!

Mitch can Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Stanley Wojcicki, Mason Yearian ever, ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. Or are they just plain dumb scientists who cannot even multiply 105 by 9 and see it is in sigma error of 940 or 938.

HISTORY OF THE PROTON MASS and the 945 MeV //Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

In 2016-2017, AP discovered that the real proton has a mass of 840 MeV, not 938. The real electron was actually the muon and the muon stays inside the proton that forms a proton torus of 8 rings and with the muon as bar magnet is a Faraday Law producing magnetic monopoles. So this book is all about why researchers of physics and engineers keep getting the number 938MeV when they should be getting the number 840 MeV + 105 MeV = 945 MeV.

Cover Picture is a proton torus of 8 rings with a muon of 1 ring inside the proton torus, doing the Faraday Law and producing magnetic monopoles.
Length: 17 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : December 18, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 17 pages
• File Size : 698 KB
• ASIN : B082WYGVNG
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

#1-4, 105th published book

Atom Geometry is Torus Geometry // Atom Totality series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Since all atoms are doing the Faraday Law inside them, of their thrusting muon into a proton coil in the shape of a geometry torus, then the torus is the geometry of each and every atom. But then we must explain the neutrons since the muon and proton are doing Faraday's Law, then the neutron needs to be explained in terms of this proton torus with muon inside, all three shaped as rings. The muon is a single ring and each proton is 8 rings. The neutron is shaped like a plate and is solid not hollow. The explanation of a neutron is that of a capacitor storing what the proton-muon rings produce in electricity. Where would the neutron parallel plates be located? I argue in this text that the neutron plates when fully grown from 1 eV until 945MeV are like two parallel plate capacitors where each neutron is part of one plate, like two pieces of bread with the proton-muon torus being a hamburger patty.

Cover Picture: I assembled two atoms in this picture where the proton torus with a band of muons inside traveling around and around the proton torus producing electricity. And the pie-plates represent neutrons as parallel-plate capacitors.
Length: 39 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : March 24, 2020
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• ASIN : B086BGSNXN
• Print Length : 39 pages
• File Size : 935 KB
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,656,820 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#6413 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
#315 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
#4953 in Physics (Kindle Store)



#1-5, 112th published book

New Perspective on Psi^2 in the Schrodinger Equation in a Atom Totality Universe// Atom Totality series, book 5
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

I first heard of the Schrodinger equation in college chemistry class. We never actually did any problem solving with the equation, and we were only told about it. Then taking physics my next year in college and after I bought the Feynman Lectures on Physics, just for fun for side reading, three volume set did I learn what this Schrodinger equation and the Psi^2 wavefunction was about. I am not going to teach the mathematics of the Schrodinger equation and the math calculations of the Psi or Psi^2 in this book, but leave that up to the reader or student to do that from Feynman's Lectures on Physics. The purpose of this book is to give a new and different interpretation of what Psi^2 is, what Psi^2 means. Correct interpretation of physics experiments and observations turns out to be one of the most difficult tasks in all of physics.

Cover Picture: a photograph taken of me in 1993, after the discovery of Plutonium Atom Totality, and I was 43 years old then, on a wintery hill of New Hampshire. It is nice that Feynman wrote a physics textbook series, for I am very much benefitting from his wisdom. If he had not done that, getting organized in physics by writing textbooks, I would not be writing this book.. And I would not have discovered the true meaning of the Fine Structure Constant, for it was Feynman who showed us that FSC is really 0.0854, not that of 0.0072. All because 0.0854 is Psi, and Psi^2 is 0.0072.
Length: 20 pages

Product details
• ASIN : B0875SVDC7
• Publication date : April 15, 2020
• Language: : English
• File size : 1134 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 20 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #240,066 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #65 in General Chemistry & Reference
◦ #481 in Physics (Kindle Store)

#1-6, 135th published book

QED in Atom Totality theory where proton is a 8 ring torus and electron = muon inside proton doing Faraday Law// Atom Totality series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) 

Since the real true electron of atoms is the muon and is a one ring bar magnet thrusting through the 8 ring torus of a proton, we need a whole entire new model of the hydrogen atom. Because the Bohr model with the 0.5MeV particle jumping orbitals as the explanation of Spectral Lines is all wrong. In this vacuum of explaining spectral line physics, comes the AP Model which simply states that the hydrogen atom creates Spectral lines because at any one instant of time 4 of the 8 proton rings is "in view" and the electricity coming from those 4 view rings creates spectral line physics.

Cover Picture: Is a imitation of the 8 ring proton torus, with my fingers holding on the proton ring that has the muon ring perpendicular and in the equatorial plane of the proton rings, thrusting through. This muon ring is the same size as the 8 proton rings making 9 x 105MeV = 945MeV of energy. The muon ring has to be perpendicular and lie on the equator of the proton torus. Surrounding the proton-torus would be neutrons as skin or coating cover and act as capacitors in storing the electricity produced by the proton+muon.

Product details
• ASIN : B08K47K5BB
• Publication date : September 25, 2020
• Language : English
• File size : 587 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 25 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #291,001 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #13 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #52 in General Chemistry & Reference
◦ #334 in General Chemistry

#1-7, 138th published book
The true NUCLEUS of Atoms are inner toruses moving around in circles of a larger outer torus// Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden Experiment revisited // Atom Totality Series, book 7 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The geometry of Atoms of the Table of Chemical Elements is torus geometry. We know this to be true for the torus geometry forms the maximum electricity production when using the Faraday Law. We see this in Old Physics with their tokamak toruses attempting to make fusion, by accelerating particles of the highest possible acceleration for the torus is that geometry. But the torus is the geometry not only of maximum acceleration but of maximum electrical generation by having a speeding bar magnet go around and around inside a torus== the Faraday law, where the torus rings are the copper closed wire loop. The protons of atoms are 8 loops of rings in a torus geometry, and the electron of atoms is the muon as bar magnet, almost the same size as the proton loops but small enough to fit inside proton loops. It is torus geometry that we investigate the geometry of all atoms.
Length: 41 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : October 9, 2020
• File Size : 828 KB
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print Length : 41 pages
• ASIN : B08KZT5TCD
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

#1-8, 1st published book

Atom Totality Universe, 8th edition, 2017// A history log book: Atom Totality Series book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision 7Apr2021. This was AP's first published science book.

Advisory: This is a difficult book to read and is AP's research log book of the Atom Totality in 2016-2017. I want to keep it for its history value. AP advises all readers wanting to know the Plutonium Atom Totality theory to go to the 9th edition that is the latest up to date account of this theory.. The reason AP wants to keep the 8th edition is because of Historical Value, for in this book, while writing it, caused the discovery of the real electron is the muon of atoms. The real proton of atoms is 840MeV and not the 938MeV that most books claim. The particle discovered by JJ Thomson in 1897 thinking he discovered the electron of atoms was actually the Dirac magnetic monopole at 0.5MeV. This discovery changes every, every science that uses atoms and electricity and magnetism, in other words, every science.

On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
> > On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> >> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> >>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> >>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> >>>>>> That math is rightly named...
> >>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
> >>>>>> Because negative one does not
> >>>>>> exist that formula does not...
> >>>>> *
> >>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> >>>>>
> >>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> >>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> >>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
> >>>>
> >>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> >>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> >>> KON
> >>
> >> AP wants to use my work.
> >> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
> >>
> >> Mitchell Raemsch
> >
> > *
> > Mitchell:
> >
> > I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
> >
> > You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
> >
> > You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
> >
> > earle
> > *
> >
> >

The reality of imaginary math.
math admits It is a formula without a solution.
That is how it got its name.

Mitchell Raemsch

fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 03:24:01 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> > On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > >> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> > >>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > >>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > >>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > >>>>>> That math is rightly named...
> > >>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
> > >>>>>> Because negative one does not
> > >>>>>> exist that formula does not...
> > >>>>> *
> > >>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > >>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > >>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> > >>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> > >>> KON
> > >>
> > >> AP wants to use my work.
> > >> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
> > >>
> > >> Mitchell Raemsch
> > >
> > > *
> > > Mitchell:
> > >
> > > I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
> > >
> > > You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
> > >
> > > You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
> > >
> > > earle
> > > *
> > >
> > >
> The reality of imaginary math.
> math admits It is a formula without a solution.
> That is how it got its name.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch
false

x^2+1=0

has the solution i and -i

so wrong.

On 12/16/2021 9:12 PM, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 03:24:01 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
>> On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
>>> On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
>>>> On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
>>>>>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>>>>>>> That math is rightly named...
>>>>>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
>>>>>>>>> Because negative one does not
>>>>>>>>> exist that formula does not...
>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
>>>>>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
>>>>>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>>>>>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
>>>>>> KON
>>>>>
>>>>> AP wants to use my work.
>>>>> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>> Mitchell:
>>>>
>>>> I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
>>>>
>>>> You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
>>>>
>>>> You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
>>>>
>>>> earle
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>> The reality of imaginary math.
>> math admits It is a formula without a solution.
>> That is how it got its name.
>>
>> Mitchell Raemsch
> false
>
> x^2+1=0
>
> has the solution i and -i
>
> so wrong.

Wrong... If, perhaps, the observer is afraid of it? Then, they say its
wrong?

On Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 9:12:07 PM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 03:24:01 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> > > On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > > On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > >> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> > > >>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > > >>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > >>>>>> That math is rightly named...
> > > >>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
> > > >>>>>> Because negative one does not
> > > >>>>>> exist that formula does not...
> > > >>>>> *
> > > >>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > > >>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > > >>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> > > >>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> > > >>> KON
> > > >>
> > > >> AP wants to use my work.
> > > >> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
> > > >>
> > > >> Mitchell Raemsch
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > Mitchell:
> > > >
> > > > I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
> > > >
> > > > You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
> > > >
> > > > You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
> > > >
> > > > earle
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > >
> > The reality of imaginary math.
> > math admits It is a formula without a solution.
> > That is how it got its name.
> >
> > Mitchell Raemsch
> false
>
> x^2+1=0
>
> has the solution i and -i

What is the solved quantity your imaginary represents?
No. Imaginary math is named rightly.

Mitchell Raemsch

>
> so wrong.

On 12/17/2021 10:12 AM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 9:12:07 PM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
>> fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 03:24:01 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
>>> On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
>>>> On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
>>>>> On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
>>>>>>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> That math is rightly named...
>>>>>>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
>>>>>>>>>> Because negative one does not
>>>>>>>>>> exist that formula does not...
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
>>>>>>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
>>>>>>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>>>>>>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
>>>>>>> KON
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AP wants to use my work.
>>>>>> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>> Mitchell:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
>>>>>
>>>>> You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
>>>>>
>>>>> earle
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> The reality of imaginary math.
>>> math admits It is a formula without a solution.
>>> That is how it got its name.
>>>
>>> Mitchell Raemsch
>> false
>>
>> x^2+1=0
>>
>> has the solution i and -i
>
> What is the solved quantity your imaginary represents?
> No. Imaginary math is named rightly.
[...]

The imaginary numbers go along the y axis, while the real numbers are on
the x axis. So the two solutions are: 0-1i, and 0+1i. So, the x-axis is
zero for both solutions. The y axes are one unit up, and one unit down:

+y
|
|
-x -----0----- +x
|
|
-y

where x is real, and y is imaginary.

smitchisanidiot@gmail.com schwrote:
> On Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 9:12:07 PM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
....
>> x^2+1=0
>>
>> has the solution i and -i
>
> What is the solved quantity your imaginary represents?
> No. Imaginary math is named rightly.

Nothing more or less "imaginary" than any other mathematical
concept Smitch.

i = class of X in R[X]/(X^2+1)

(learn basic algebra if you don't get it, Smitch).

Another silly question, Smitch?

fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 19:12:16 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> On Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 9:12:07 PM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 03:24:01 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > > On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> > > > On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > > > On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > > >> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> > > > >>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > > > >>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > > >>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> That math is rightly named...
> > > > >>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
> > > > >>>>>> Because negative one does not
> > > > >>>>>> exist that formula does not...
> > > > >>>>> *
> > > > >>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > > > >>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > > > >>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > >>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> > > > >>> KON
> > > > >>
> > > > >> AP wants to use my work.
> > > > >> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > Mitchell:
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
> > > > >
> > > > > You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
> > > > >
> > > > > You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
> > > > >
> > > > > earle
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > The reality of imaginary math.
> > > math admits It is a formula without a solution.
> > > That is how it got its name.
> > >
> > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > false
> >
> > x^2+1=0
> >
> > has the solution i and -i
> What is the solved quantity your imaginary represents?
> No. Imaginary math is named rightly.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch
>
> >
> > so wrong.

it is i and -i, whats so difficult?

On Sunday, December 19, 2021 at 9:55:51 PM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 19:12:16 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > On Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 9:12:07 PM UTC-8, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > fredag 17 december 2021 kl. 03:24:01 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > > > On Monday, November 29, 2021 at 6:42:13 AM UTC-8, Serg io wrote:
> > > > > On 11/29/2021 12:05 AM, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat Nov 27 13:20:17 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > > > >> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-8, konyberg wrote:
> > > > > >>> lrdag 27. november 2021 kl. 20:51:53 UTC+1 skrev mitchr...@gmail.com:
> > > > > >>>> On Saturday, November 27, 2021 at 11:47:39 AM UTC-8, Earle Jones wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> On Wed Nov 24 10:02:23 2021 "mitchr...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>> That math is rightly named...
> > > > > >>>>>> it is a formula without a solution.
> > > > > >>>>>> Because negative one does not
> > > > > >>>>>> exist that formula does not...
> > > > > >>>>> *
> > > > > >>>>> Mitchell: Are you familiar with "The fundamental theorem of algebra"? (Gauss, 1799)
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>> new algebra has only a single positive quandrant.
> > > > > >>>> No negative polynomial solutions belong. No negative quantities
> > > > > >>>> just subtraction negative with a limit.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > >>> You talk like AP. You know he is mad. Are you?
> > > > > >>> KON
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> AP wants to use my work.
> > > > > >> I don't believe in anger. Do you?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Mitchell Raemsch
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > Mitchell:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that you and Archimedes Plutonium should collaborate, since you seem to agree on many mathematical ideas.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You could learn from him and he could also learn from you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You might also want to borrow from the work of John Gabriel, whose mathematics is more advanced than either you or Archimedes Plutonium. What do you think? Is this a good idea?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > earle
> > > > > > *
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > The reality of imaginary math.
> > > > math admits It is a formula without a solution.
> > > > That is how it got its name.
> > > >
> > > > Mitchell Raemsch
> > > false
> > >
> > > x^2+1=0
> > >
> > > has the solution i and -i
> > What is the solved quantity your imaginary represents?
> > No. Imaginary math is named rightly.
> >
> > Mitchell Raemsch
> >
> > >
> > > so wrong.
> it is i and -i, whats so difficult?

I is just a formula...
Math calls it imaginary because of that..
and rightly so... negatives are just
hidden or not as subtractions...

Mitchell Raemsch