Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Oct 7, 2021, 4:40:01 PM (2 days ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Which is the 6th Regular Polyhedron, dual to the Tetrahedron Re: AP's 199th book A book of New Age, New Wave math conjectures.

Looks like I already had a conjecture for a 6th regular polyhedron. But let me add this one as a competitive rival, and may the best one win.

The need for a 6th regular polyhedron to be the dual of the tetrahedron.

Conjecture 12.2
Statement the dual of the tetrahedron is in 2D and is the parallelogram made into a square, but folding the 4 faces of the tetrahedron.

On Sunday, September 12, 2021 at 2:43:18 PM UTC-5 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
It is appropriate that this be my #12 Conjecture for it involves the Dodecahedron which involves the shape of the Cosmic Atom 231Pu.

CONJECTURE #12

Statement: There are 6 regular polyhedron in all. Old Math missed a regular polyhedra of 0 face and infinitude sides of a regular polygon. We think of this object as a sphere, but it is a sphere-like polyhedra. In some respects this Sphere-Polyhedra is the dual of the Tetrahedron just as the Cube is the dual of the Octahedron, and just as the Dodecahedron is the dual of the Icosahedron.

In true math, there are no curves at all but only straightline segments strung along together to form what we conceive and perceive of as curves. The circle is a 1*10^604 string of tiny straight line segments. The sphere is formed in the same way. The sides are so tiny that we perceive them as a smooth curve when curves never ever existed. The true numbers of mathematics are discrete numbers with holes in between every number and its successor number, again, causing no smooth curve to ever exist.

The sphere is actually a Regular Polyhedron of no face, 0 face and composed of these regular polygon circles.

Actually, the proof of this conjecture should be easy because, as most of these conjectures involving the Real True numbers of mathematics have to be the Decimal Grid Numbers that allows for the Calculus to exist, that requirement is the proof of this Conjecture, that Old Math missed the 6th regular polyhedron.

And this is reasonable in the sense that 6 is the magic number of math and physics.

And another proof of this conjecture is the proof-method done in Ancient Greek times of the other 5 regular polyhedra involving angles, the constraint and restriction of angles making the 5 regular polyhedra, except they forgot to include a polyhedra of 180 degrees + 180 degrees = 360 degrees.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Oct 8, 2021, 4:01:26 PM (yesterday)



to Plutonium Atom Universe

Yesterday's conjecture of taking a 2D object as the dual of the tetrahedron is a no-go, for I later remembered that I had conjectured the sphere was the dual of the tetrahedron, for it is the technique of finding the volume of sphere using tetrahedron spikes summed up. And remember in True Mathematics, a curve is a string of fine tiny straightline segments, and no smooth curve ever exists. Just as the true numbers have holes and empty space from one number to the next number.

So although my idea of a tetrahedron has to have a dual figure, the 2D parallelogram converted to square is not going to pan out. But the Circle made into a infinite network of 1*10^-604 line segments has 0 faces but infinite number of sides to be dual to the tetrahedron of 4 faces and 6 edges or sides.

Does that make sense-- sphere has 0 faces infinite edges dual to 4 faces and 6 edges.

Compare that to a square of 1 face and 4 edges.

The numbers seem to agree with the Square as dual of Tetrahedron, but the problem is the square is 2 D.

So again, we have two Conjectures in play here and need to find out which is the true dual of the Tetrahedron.

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Oct 9, 2021, 12:06:47 PM (15 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
I am pretty sure that the Curvedstraightline Sphere is the dual of the tetrahedron. Instead, Old Math thought the tetrahedron was self dual. But I know that 6 is a magic number of completeness, and so a dual of the tetrahedron exists.

Because we need to use long spikes of tetrahedron to find the volume of sphere, offers a fast easy proof that a Sphere composed of microinfinity 1*10^-604 line segments is the dual of the tetrahedron.

This proof probably blows a hole into the Euler characteristic of regular polyhedra.

c = Vertices - Edges + Faces

A Cube for instance is 8,12,6 while its dual Octahedron is 6,12,8

A Dodecahedron is 20,30,12 while its dual is Icosahedron 12,30,20

A Tetrahedron is 4,6,4 and one would thus say self dual, but AP figures there is more to it than a vacuous self dual. Because in the physics EM laws there needs to be 6 items, in operations of math there needs to be 6 items. In logic there needs to be 6 operators. So that intuition tells me there is more to the story than 5 regular polyhedra.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Oct 9, 2021, 5:48:58 PM (10 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Saturday, October 9, 2021 at 5:08:15 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> AP's conjecture that tetrahedron dual is Curvedstraightline Sphere// 199th book
>
>
> Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
> Oct 8, 2021, 4:01:26 PM (yesterday)
> 
> 
> 
> to Plutonium Atom Universe
>
> Yesterday's conjecture of taking a 2D object as the dual of the tetrahedron is a no-go, for I later remembered that I had conjectured the sphere was the dual of the tetrahedron, for it is the technique of finding the volume of sphere using tetrahedron spikes summed up. And remember in True Mathematics, a curve is a string of fine tiny straightline segments, and no smooth curve ever exists. Just as the true numbers have holes and empty space from one number to the next number.
>
> So although my idea of a tetrahedron has to have a dual figure, the 2D parallelogram converted to square is not going to pan out. But the Circle made into a infinite network of 1*10^-604 line segments has 0 faces but infinite number of sides to be dual to the tetrahedron of 4 faces and 6 edges or sides.
>
> Does that make sense-- sphere has 0 faces infinite edges dual to 4 faces and 6 edges.
>
> Compare that to a square of 1 face and 4 edges.
>
> The numbers seem to agree with the Square as dual of Tetrahedron, but the problem is the square is 2 D.
>
> So again, we have two Conjectures in play here and need to find out which is the true dual of the Tetrahedron.
> 
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
> Oct 9, 2021, 12:06 PM (4 hours ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to Plutonium Atom Universe

Now Jacobs in his geometry book, 2nd edition, 1987, GEOMETRY, page 567 shows a picture of him figuring out the volume of a sphere using tetrahedron like spikes. His spikes use all manner of pyramid like faces in order to come close to a sphere volume and the volume of one of these spikes is 1/3(B*r) where B is the area of face, and r is the length of the altitude.

What AP is going to use is long spikes of tetrahedron where all the bases are 60-60-60 triangles and the altitude will be the radius of the sphere.

So a preliminary Euler characteristic formula of V - E + F

Would entail 3*10^604 , 3*10^604, 1*10^604 which when factored out is a ratio of 3,3,1. The tetrahedron ratio is 4,6,4.

Yes, I think it is a easy proof that the tetrahedron is dual to Curvedstraightline Sphere. There are many other cases in mathematics where a nice formula falls apart at the start but is later exact. All because close to 0, nice tidy formulas only start to work when you get further away from 0. A case in point that everyone knows of is Old Math primes that 2 is prime in their error filled understanding of numbers, so they have to get away from 2 and start at 3 to make things work in their error filled quagmire mess of their beloved Old Math. So just like 2 is prime, the Old Math offers the dumb and silly notion that of a self dual for tetrahedron, never growing out of their clown age group and actually looking for the real dual of the tetrahedron.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics and where Mathematics is but a warm up exercise for the King in morning

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
Oct 9, 2021, 10:52:16 PM (5 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Alright, I believe I can vastly improve on the below. Now these spikes are going to be more of pyramids except for the base or face being a 60-60-60 triangle where we obtain the volume of the sphere.
> Now Jacobs in his geometry book, 2nd edition, 1987, GEOMETRY, page 567 shows a picture of him figuring out the volume of a sphere using tetrahedron like spikes. His spikes use all manner of pyramid like faces in order to come close to a sphere volume and the volume of one of these spikes is 1/3(B*r) where B is the area of face, and r is the length of the altitude.
>
> What AP is going to use is long spikes of tetrahedron where all the bases are 60-60-60 triangles and the altitude will be the radius of the sphere.
>
> So a preliminary Euler characteristic formula of V - E + F
>
> Would entail 3*10^604 , 3*10^604, 1*10^604 which when factored out is a ratio of 3,3,1. The tetrahedron ratio is 4,6,4.
>
And here, what I propose is making a sphere into a grid system of latitude and longitude lines so that the sphere surface has tiny squares or rectangles and we make the squares so tiny that we can make the tetrahedron faces of 4 faces form a parallelogram and where we superimpose those parallelograms onto the tiny squares or rectangles.

This conjecture is morphing into the Partitioning of the Sphere as duals to Polyhedra.

If we consider a CurvedStraightline Sphere, this is a normal sphere with a big stipulation, that the curve is made up completely of tiny fine straightline segments, so it is a dense polyhedra.

And the dual of the Tetrahedron is one of these CurvedStraightline Spheres.

I have not yet worked out the vertices, edges and faces of the Tetrahedron dual, but am almost certain one exists.

Lately I have been nesting the sphere inside a cube, then simultaneously nesting a cube inside the sphere.

Now bear with me, for this is hard to see in the mind's eye.

The cube nested inside the sphere intersects in 8 points. And because it is a CurvedStraightline Sphere means those 8 points mark out with appropriate longitude lines, mark out that CurvedStraightline Sphere 6 faces. The 6 faces needed for the dual of Tetrahedron.

But in so doing, I have a new conjecture. That the symmetry of the Cube is so special to the Sphere, that only the cube can map out Equal Faces in the CurvedStraightline-Sphere.

I have tried the tetrahedron, octahedron, dodec, and icos hedrons and for some reason they cannot deliver equal faces in the CurvedStraightline-Sphere, only the Cube can do that.

So this will be another conjecture added on to the list.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

Alright, it will be sometime before I get to this book to write, and fill in the details.

I am almost certain that there is a 6th Regular Polyhedron that involves a CurvedStraightline-Sphere. This is a sphere that is not round but has upwards of 10^604 vertices, edges and faces.

And no-one has ever even imagined this polyhedron, because no-one before me had a infinity borderline to work with.

We can think of the smallest known polyhedron of Tetrahedron as the number 4, think of the cube as 6, octahedron as 8, etc. Well we can think of the CurvedStraightline-Sphere as either infinity or as 0.

What drives me to think this is true about a 6th regular polyhedron is that 6 is a magic number throughout science, especially physics since the EM laws require 6 laws for completeness. That leaves a gaping hole of a mess in polyhedrons if there are only 5 of them. Same as in Logic if there are only 5 operators when there really are 6, or in math where there are 6 operators as we include derivative and integral to the other four of add, subtract, multiply,divide.

So that is what is impelling me to think of a 6th regular polyhedron.

But a snag has come up also, as to whether all the other 5 regular polyhedron have a dual of this CurvedStraightline-Sphere.

And to help answer some of these questions, we need a coordinate system be placed upon a sphere surface with equally spaced points and 10^604 such points. This is difficult to imagine in the mind alone. So I have already endeavored to retrieve some of my old fish netting that was used by someone as house decoration. And I place the fish netting over the globe sphere and try to visualize the sphere covered entirely in equally spaced dots.

This has never been done to a sphere.

I may end up using mosquito netting.

What I want to avoid is overlap. I want equal spacing of dots.

Once I have that equal spacing, and we can allow for blobs of nonequal as shown in Jacobs book where he computes surface area by pyramid spikes. He shows all manner of sizes and shapes of bases of pyramids to cover the sphere surface.

I do not have to be too fussy about equal spaced dots.

And here is where the tetrahedron comes in. Instead of pyramid spikes I use tetrahedron spikes.

And what I vaguely can discern will come out of this, is that I can get a unique correspondence of this infinite sphere only with a tetrahedron.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

🐒 of Math and 🦍 of Physics Archimedes "AnalButtfuckManure" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
> On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 7:18:01 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Archimedes "AnalButtfuckManure" Plutonium
>
>>> Although, Kibo, I really cannot find any science math or physics
>>> content in your invention of the word "analbuttfuckmanure". But then
>>> maybe your invention was spurred by your insistence that 938 is 12%
>>> short of 945.
>
>> Quit lying, LiarPlutonium. YOU invented that word, probably because
>> you're gay with some sort of animal poop fetish. The first place YOU
>> used that was here:
>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/HBsxUDQU94c/m/UJyuO6eCAAAJ,
>> on January 27 2018. It was a reference to me, so I guess you've had
>> the hots for me from the start. Sorry, Plutonium, I'm not that type.
>> Forget it!

> AP writes: No, I invented the term "emailbombing" back in the 1990s
> and was duly given credit for my word invention, that word
> "emailbombing" and even Wikipedia cited me for the invention.

Don't be shy, ArchiePoo. You deserve full credit (blame) for damaging
Usenet by creating "analbuttfuckmanure" as well as all the other damage
you cause.

Everyone knows you invented "analbuttfuckmanure" because you're gay and
have certain barnyard fetishes. But please don't involve me with your
sick fetishes.

Kibo Parry M why does Harvard Lawrence Bacow & MIT Cynthia Barnhart keep continuing to propagandize and brainwash students that the slant cut of cone is a ellipse when it really is a Oval, and why do they brainwash kids with Boole Logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, and why do these two college presidents never demand a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus from their math professors? Kibo are they in it for the money and status but never the truth of science?

Kibo, why cannot Bacow & Barnhart take the time of 5 minutes like every student in the world and roll up a paper cone, drop a Kerr or Mason lid inside and tilt it and prove to himself, herself that the slant cut in cone is a Oval, never the ellipse.

Kibo, are you paid by NSF, Dr. Panchanathan to defame other people on Usenet? We know you stalk people for 28 years nonstop.
On Monday, October 11, 2021 at 8:51:49 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🐒 of Math and 🦍 of Physics Archimedes "AnalButtfuckManure" Plutonium

Zelos, why is Andrew Wiles running and hiding from the truth of mathematics, is he scared of the truth. Just like Andrew Wiles never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, only his "limit analysis hornswaggle". Does Andrew still believe Calculus is "not geometry" not geometry as the excuse and reason that Andrew has no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. See AP's proofs below.

On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 6:27:45 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> Den torsdag 8 mars 2018 kl. 23:15:10 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> > Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
> >

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)

5th published book

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

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

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

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

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

Length: 72 pages

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

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



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

William J. Burns struggling for relevance, David S. Cohen Analbuttfuckmanure
On Monday, October 11, 2021 at 8:51:49 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🐒 of Math and 🦍 of Physics Archimedes "AnalButtfuckManure" Plutonium
> <plutonium....@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
> > On Sunday, October 10, 2021 at 7:18:01 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> Archimedes "AnalButtfuckManure" Plutonium

Why has the CIA become a vicious govt. department that attacks private citizens for 30 years stalking nonstop?

Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> >
> >http://www.netscum.net/fieldsm0.html
> What the hell is this? As if it's not bad enough that we have a fake
> Mao Zhedong here, now we have a fake kibo too?
> Is there a fake xibo and a ~ibo to round out the trinity?
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

---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 ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Dr. Panchanathan , present day
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh
Arden Lee Bement Jr.
Rita R. Colwell
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993

Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua

#1-1, 148th published book

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, 9th edition 2021, Atom Totality Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 30Nov2021. And this is AP's 148th published science book.

Preface:
Physics book that explains what the universe is, and how it works. This is a continuation of the Atomic Theory by Democritus in Ancient Greek times. It adds one more fact to the Atomic Theory picture. That the Universe itself is one gigantic big atom. The picture is that of the Universe, in total, is one big atom that contains more atoms, inside itself. It completes the logic of science that Dr. Feynman wrote-- all things are made up of atoms -- and so, to complete that idea -- all things and the universe itself is an atom.

In this edition of year 2021, AP actually proves the Atom Totality theory, and therefore, a simultaneously _disproof_ of the Big Bang theory. The proof is simple, in that the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but rather, instead, shine from the Faraday law going on inside each and every proton in the Sun or star, or, in the Universe. The muon is the true electron of atoms and is the bar magnet in Faraday's law while the proton is a 840MeV particle in the geometry shape of 8 ring coil torus that is the closed loop coil in Faraday's Law. NASA scientists have discovered the Sun is a yearly increase in radiation of 0.005% yearly, and is why 25% of all insects have perished in the last decade 2010-2020. Stars and Sun shine from Faraday law, not from fusion and that is how the Universe itself grows. So, we cannot logically have two different mechanisms for the creation of the Universe. We cannot have electricity magnetism of Faraday law and then some silly "explosion of Big Bang" to create and grow the universe.

Also, in the course of providing supporting evidence of the Atom Totality theory, my research had to revise and correct the entire Maxwell Equations, and revise and correct the theory, the quantum electrodynamics theory.

Cover Picture: Again I used 8 rings from plumbing hardware to represent the 8 rings of a proton torus, and visualize each ring as a dot cloud pattern instead of a continuous ring, and the holes in some of those rings helps facilitate that image. Notice the muon ring is inside the proton torus rings, and perpendicular, and situated at the equator, going around and around the proton torus at nearly the speed of light in the Faraday law; producing electricity. Atoms are designed to produce maximum electricity, given their masses.
Length: 329 pages

Product details
• ASIN : B08T82M2LP
• Publication date : January 16, 2021
• Language: : English
• File size : 872 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 329 pages
• Lending : Enabled

#1-2, 48th published book

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

--------------------------
Table of Contents
--------------------------

1) A visual image of a Atom Totality

2) Simply multiply 9 times 105MeV and there you get the rest mass of proton and neutron.

3) The tau-electron 1777MeV is merely 105MeV multiply by 17 is 1785 with Sigma Error of 0.4%.

4) Particle in the 840MeV range so that we can say we discovered the proton particle isolated of its internal muon.

5) Found a 840MeV particle in experimental physics, but, is it the proton torus without its interior occupied by a muon?

6) The theory of 9s, as help in physics.

7) How we picture the interior of Atoms, and the Atom Totality.

8) The Principle of Scooting-Over, applied.

9) An ongoing commentary of the geometry of atoms, both interior and exterior.

10) Galaxies form Rings in Faraday Coil, and Faraday bar-magnet // Cosmic Proton, Cosmic Muon.

11) Is there a Cosmic Faraday Law going on?
Length: 148 pages

Product details
File Size: 2370 KB
Print Length: 148 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: June 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07SW87BF5
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #285,417 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#826 in Astronomy (Books)
#166 in Astronomy (Kindle Store)
#671 in Physics (Kindle Store)

#1-3, 74th published book

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

2William J. Burns struggling for relevance, David S. Cohen Analbuttfuckmanure
(snip the CIA hate stalking spew of nonstop 30 years from Kibo Parry M.)

AP's most recent published book of science-- The Racehorse is the fastest land animal, not the cheetah. And where AP teaches the difference between speed and acceleration. Something that few biologists learned.

#4-1, 32nd published book
Physics Superdeterminism replaces Darwin Evolution // biophysics series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

When I graduated from college in 1972, I set myself upon a journey task mission of life-- that I was going to mathematize the biology theory of evolution. What I mean by that is -- I was going to make evolution a mathematical theory. And so from 1972 until 1990, I was working on this project, with never really expecting to solve it. But then, to my delight and joy of life, I did solve it in 7 November 1990 with the discovery of the Plutonium Atom Totality. A bigger theory than even mathematizing Darwin Evolution. And one structure of the Atom Totality is quantum mechanics of Superdeterminism, which is a mathematical basis of evolution. What the below writings and posts are, is my notebook, research notebook pertaining to Evolution theory of Biology BET from 1990 on through 2010. A personal memoir of my research notes on Darwin Evolution and how it relates to Atom Totality. In summary form, Darwin Evolution is not a true theory of science for it was replaced by Quantum Mechanics Superdeterminism. NOVA, the tv show recently had a feature program only they called it "quantum entanglement". So Evolution theory is no longer a valid science theory but has been replaced by Superdeterminism. And what Darwin Evolution is-- is a rule or algorithm that captures the essence of what goes on sometimes, but misses vast parts of science of life.. A rule, an algorithm of science is not science truth, but sort of like a model.

From 2010 until present day March 2019, I made more discoveries of physics and biology so that the below is sort of out of date and needs a second edition. Discoveries of what is First Life, is a important subject in Evolution theory and I discovered that circa 2016 that a physics capacitor is a lifeform. All life evolved from capacitors, and the plant and animal and one celled organisms when reduced to bare minimum are capacitors. My body, your body is simply a advanced and complex physics capacitor. Then in 2017, I discovered that the real electron of atoms is the muon at 105MeV, real proton is 840MeV and that little particle we thought was the electron of .5MeV turns out to be Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. That discovery changes very much everything in biology, even evolution theory. And finally, throughout 2010 to 2019 I have been reducing all of physics to be a subject based upon electromagnetism. And so when I write the second edition (if ever) about Evolution theory, it has to be written as if you are in a electricity magnetism classroom.

So, below is my memoir of evolution theory of biology from 1990 to 2010.

Cover picture: Me and two of my cats. Sure, they evolved, but more to the truth, they were fated. Both died from coyotes. Coyotes have to eat, too.
Length: 181 pages

Product details
• File size : 2407 KB
• Publication date : March 30, 2019
• Print length : 181 pages
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• ASIN : B07Q5NV3C5
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #143,708 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #123 in Evolution (Kindle Store)
◦ #239 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #1,220 in Evolution (Books)

#4-2, 18th published book

First Life = Capacitor of Physics // biophysics series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
#1 New Release in Molecular Biology


All Life comes from a capacitor of physics. Life starts as a capacitor and evolves into more advanced capacitor. Whether a given capacitor evolves into and harbors a DNA molecule and becomes a DNA capacitor life depends. And all life forms, when reduced, is a reduction to a capacitor. For a human body or the body of any plant or animal is a very advanced and complex capacitor. All life in the Universe starts as a Capacitor of Physics.

Product details
File Size: 1574 KB
Print Length: 155 pages
Publication Date: March 15, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PNT5SRT
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #4,177,228 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#427 in Biophysics (Kindle Store)
#1389 in Molecular Biology (Kindle Store)
#2359 in Biophysics (Books)



#4-3, 34th published book

Photons and Neutrinos have "perfect DNA/RNA" packaged inside them// biophysics series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 18Feb2021. This is AP's 34th published book.
Preface: Part of this is my history on the subject. And part is my current ongoing research into the geometry of the interior of photons and neutrinos.. Many changes have occurred from 1995 to present 2019. Until 2018, I imagined the interior of atoms as the Rutherford Model with nucleus and electrons as dot-clouds. However in 2017 when I discovered the real electron is the muon at 105MeV and real proton is 840MeV and the neutron is 945MeV leaving that little .5MeV particle as the Dirac Magnetic Monopole, changes not only physics and chemistry but every hard science is changed. The big change is that subatomic particles have jobs, tasks, work to do and the proton is the coil in Faraday's law, the muon is the bar magnet in Faraday's law, the neutron is a capacitor and the photon, neutrino are wires in the interior of atoms. This changes the geometry of the interior of atoms to where Rutherford model is thrown out the window. So we have the AP-Faraday model of the interior of atoms and that means closed loops or rings. That new perspective also means photons have an interior geometry as well as neutrinos. And so, the double helix of DNA, RNA, is the same as two intertwined springs. The only thing I have missing is what is the A,T, C,G of a photon or neutrino?

Currently as of 2021, I still need to solve the geometry of the interior of atoms and photons included. A spring with rings is the geometry, but I have a few more difficulties to iron out.

Cover Photo: Is a picture of a stretched slinky toy spring and I tried to intertwine them as a double helix. Looks like I came close. But sadly, when I pulled the toy spring down off, I found I had knotted the spring and had to take 15 minutes to unknot the spring.
Length: 42 pages

Product details
ASIN : B07Q4ZY7PZ
Publication date : April 1, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1472 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Enabled
Print length : 42 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #138,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #4 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #6 in Biophysics (Kindle Store)
◦ #8 in Molecular Biology (Kindle Store)






#4-4, 51st published book
DNA transportation mechanism hypothesis, DNA-Capacitor// biophysics series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface: Now let me warn the reader up front here, that this is a hypothesis of science, a conjecture of science, a speculation of science and has not been proven in science. Some people do not know the difference between proven science and hypothesis. So do not read this book, thinking this is a proven topic of science. What started me on this topic was a question of how the animal body gets calcium atoms moved to sites the cells want, or move any atom that is needed at a location of the body or cell, or move any molecule that is needed at a specific location. So the question was, what transportation system of moving specific atoms or molecules to sites in the cell or body and what is the mechanism of that system.

Cover Picture shows the nucleotides of DNA of adenine, thymine and cytosine, guanine off my computer along with a model of DNA.

Length: 18 pages

Product details
File Size: 2857 KB
Print Length: 18 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: July 23, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07VLC51BS

#4-5, 67th published book

Evolution of Animals and Organs from Plants //biophysics series, book 5 (biology series) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface: Strange how a little exploration for me in 10 Oct 2019 would end up landing me with a whole theory of how animals evolved from plants and the order in which animal organs evolved, all in the space of a few days in October 2019. Below in this text is a history of that discovery.

Cover: The cover is my camera photo of my computer of a Google search for "blue-green algae anatomy". We can see quite clearly how blue-green algae is a capacitor of physics!

Product details
File Size: 1025 KB
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: October 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07ZBNKBPY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #487,284 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#15649 in Biological Sciences (Books)
#4070 in Evolution (Books)
#494 in Evolution (Kindle Store)