2- Dan Christensen on failed math MIT Gilbert Strang, with his scatterbrained Calculus books, no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, because Gilbert never knew Calculus was geometry, and the time he wrote the definition of complex number on page 360, but never defined what the hell the numbers were that he used all along. Gilbert is a product of a math community that never used logic in thinking for Gilbert accepts Boole Logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 when people with logic know the AND truth table is TTTF, not the ignorant Boole's TFFF. So, Dan feels the need to stalk Gilbert Strang as the failure of math that he is.

On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of

AP writes: So, Dan, your warning means stay clear of MIT as a school that does propaganda, not the truth of science.

1- Dan Christensen on failed physicist Donna Strickland, so stupid in physics cannot even ask the simple question of which is the true real electron of atoms, is it the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole.

On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of

On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 1:45:28 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Drag Queen of Science"
> fails at math and science:

AP writes: Then what about Univ of Waterloo, subjected to the ignorance of Donna with her moron electron, does that not make Waterloo a education wasteland, Kibo Parry M.??

Re: 135,568 Student victims Queen's Univ. James Leech, Arthur B. McDonald by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- his mindless electron =0.5MeV when real electron of
#2-1, 137th published book Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series,
May 10, 2021
by Professor Wordsmith

On Thursday, June 24, 2021 at 1:56:06 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of

Re: 135,566 Student victims Queen's Univ. James Leech, Arthur B. McDonald by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- his mindless electron =0.5MeV when real electron o
#2-1, 137th published book Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series,
May 10, 2021
by Michael Moroney

Kibo Parry M. on Dartmouth College with his 28 year nonstop stalking.

Michael Moroney wrote
> Jun 20, 2021, 11:11:48 PM
> 
> 💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge"
> Michael Moroney's profile photo
> Michael Moroney wrote
> 11:29 AM
Kibo Parry M. on Dartmouth💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge" Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner, Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble,
> Michael Moroney's profile photo and is he a paid stalker by NSF paid to stalk 24-7-365
On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 8:24:00 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> fails at math and science:

On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 12:55:53 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "FireD your ass"
> >
Dartmouth College: Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble, Asher Auel, Peter Doyle, Anne Gelb, Marcia Groszek, Ethan Levien, Peter J Mucha, Rosa C. Orellana, Scott D. Pauls, Daniel N. Rockmore, Thomas R. Shemanske, John, D Trout, Erik van Erp, John Voight, Dorothy I. Wallace, David L. Webb, Dana P. Williams, Peter Winkler
Miles P. Blencowe, Robert R. Caldwell, Brian Charles Chabover, Richard Denton, Robert A. Fesen, Marcelo Gleiser, Ryan Hickox, Mary K. Hudson, James William LaBelle, Kristina Anne Lynch, Robyn Millan, Hans Mueller, Elisabeth Newton, Roberto Onofrio, Alex Rimberg, Barrett N. Rogers, John R. Thorstensen, Lorenza Viola, Martin N. Wybourne, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner

On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 1:14:40 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Drag Queen of Science"
> fails at math and scienc

On Saturday, September 5, 2020 at 5:10:28 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Piñata of sci.math and Punching Bag of sci.physics

No Dartmouth math or physics professor can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor even ask the simple question, which is the real true electron of atoms, is it the muon stuck inside a proton of 840MeV doing the Faraday law inside the proton, or the 0.5MeV particle is it the electron or the Dirac magnetic monopole. With this blight over Dartmouth College, it is a wonder that they even open their doors for a education. Considering they cannot even think straight and clear with their Boole Logic of AND truth table of TFFF when in reality it is TTTF to have 2 AND 1 = 3 and not Dartmouth teaching 2 OR 1 = 3. So is Dartmouth even a school or more like a propaganda camp?

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)

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

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.

On 6/25/2021 3:28 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> 2- Dan Christensen on failed math MIT Gilbert Strang, with his scatterbrained Calculus books, no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, because Gilbert never knew Calculus was geometry, and the time he wrote the definition of complex number on page 360, but never defined what the hell the numbers were that he used all along. Gilbert is a product of a math community that never used logic in thinking for Gilbert accepts Boole Logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 when people with logic know the AND truth table is TTTF, not the ignorant Boole's TFFF. So, Dan feels the need to stalk Gilbert Strang as the failure of math that he is.
>
>
> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
>> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of
>
> AP writes: So, Dan, your warning means stay clear of MIT as a school that does propaganda, not the truth of science.
>
>
> 1- Dan Christensen on failed physicist Donna Strickland, so stupid in physics cannot even ask the simple question of which is the true real electron of atoms, is it the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole.
>
> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 1:36:48 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
>> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of
>
> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 1:45:28 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> "Drag Queen of Science"
>> fails at math and science:
>
> AP writes: Then what about Univ of Waterloo, subjected to the ignorance of Donna with her moron electron, does that not make Waterloo a education wasteland, Kibo Parry M.??
>
>
> Re: 135,568 Student victims Queen's Univ. James Leech, Arthur B. McDonald by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- his mindless electron =0.5MeV when real electron of
> #2-1, 137th published book Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series,
> May 10, 2021
> by Professor Wordsmith
>
> On Thursday, June 24, 2021 at 1:56:06 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
>> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of
>
> Re: 135,566 Student victims Queen's Univ. James Leech, Arthur B. McDonald by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- his mindless electron =0.5MeV when real electron o
> #2-1, 137th published book Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series,
> May 10, 2021
> by Michael Moroney
>
>
> Kibo Parry M. on Dartmouth College with his 28 year nonstop stalking.
>
>
> Michael Moroney wrote
>> Jun 20, 2021, 11:11:48 PM
>> 
>> 💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge"
>> Michael Moroney's profile photo
>> Michael Moroney wrote
>> 11:29 AM
> Kibo Parry M. on Dartmouth💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge" Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner, Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble,
>> Michael Moroney's profile photo and is he a paid stalker by NSF paid to stalk 24-7-365
> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 8:24:00 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> fails at math and science:
>
>
> On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 12:55:53 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> "FireD your ass"
>>>
> Dartmouth College: Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble, Asher Auel, Peter Doyle, Anne Gelb, Marcia Groszek, Ethan Levien, Peter J Mucha, Rosa C. Orellana, Scott D. Pauls, Daniel N. Rockmore, Thomas R. Shemanske, John, D Trout, Erik van Erp, John Voight, Dorothy I. Wallace, David L. Webb, Dana P. Williams, Peter Winkler
> Miles P. Blencowe, Robert R. Caldwell, Brian Charles Chabover, Richard Denton, Robert A. Fesen, Marcelo Gleiser, Ryan Hickox, Mary K. Hudson, James William LaBelle, Kristina Anne Lynch, Robyn Millan, Hans Mueller, Elisabeth Newton, Roberto Onofrio, Alex Rimberg, Barrett N. Rogers, John R. Thorstensen, Lorenza Viola, Martin N. Wybourne, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 1:14:40 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> "Drag Queen of Science"
>> fails at math and scienc
>
> On Saturday, September 5, 2020 at 5:10:28 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Piñata of sci.math and Punching Bag of sci.physics
>
> No Dartmouth math or physics professor can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor even ask the simple question, which is the real true electron of atoms, is it the muon stuck inside a proton of 840MeV doing the Faraday law inside the proton, or the 0.5MeV particle is it the electron or the Dirac magnetic monopole. With this blight over Dartmouth College, it is a wonder that they even open their doors for a education. Considering they cannot even think straight and clear with their Boole Logic of AND truth table of TFFF when in reality it is TTTF to have 2 AND 1 = 3 and not Dartmouth teaching 2 OR 1 = 3. So is Dartmouth even a school or more like a propaganda camp?[...]

You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.

Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol. ;^)

On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>
> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
>
> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol. ;^)

No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.

On 6/25/2021 4:22 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>
>> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
>>
>> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol. ;^)
>
> No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.
>

Well, this is why you should create your own calculator program and put
it up online. Right? ;^)

On 6/25/2021 8:30 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 6/25/2021 4:22 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>
>>> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
>>>
>>> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol.
>>> ;^)
>>
>> No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or
>> Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not
>> TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd
>> thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than
>> Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather
>> be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.
>>
>
> Well, this is why you should create your own calculator program and put
> it up online. Right? ;^)

Actually, I would be willing to dedicate some space on my site. I can
call it "AP's Corner". You program your calculator in JavaScript, and
create its GUI using HTML 5, and I just might put it up online. ;^)

My site is under development anyway:

http://fractallife247.com/test

Perhaps a name could be, click on the link to see the plaintext. This is
encrypted using my HMAC cipher with the default key, so anybody can
decrypt it:

http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=48e1a583062ffe45885872914be51a90f14a2e13d25709c46a98139d6a9a9e3aaede18babae8e04878223e91963f91f107c03c163c826322c59e793c0283b27a5a167d0edabd15a53605214e87cc76b1da33c324

;^)

Btw, check this out:

http://fractallife247.com/fdla

Try clicking around on the canvas...

Also, check this out:

http://fractallife247.com/test/vfield

On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 7:09:27 PM UTC-4, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 6/25/2021 3:28 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

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

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

Note that AP will often delete his bizarre and hateful postings when his lies are called out, only to repost identical ones moments later in a NEW thread.

Readers should, of course, judge for themselves. In AP's OWN WORDS here:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Which could explain...

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

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

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

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

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

And if that wasn't weird enough...

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

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

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

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

Dan

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

On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 10:36:21 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 6/25/2021 8:30 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > On 6/25/2021 4:22 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> >>>
> >>> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
> >>>
> >>> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol.
> >>> ;^)
> >>
> >> No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or
> >> Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not
> >> TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd
> >> thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than
> >> Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather
> >> be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.
> >>
> >
> > Well, this is why you should create your own calculator program and put
> > it up online. Right? ;^)
> Actually, I would be willing to dedicate some space on my site. I can
> call it "AP's Corner". You program your calculator in JavaScript, and
> create its GUI using HTML 5, and I just might put it up online. ;^)
>
> My site is under development anyway:
>
> http://fractallife247.com/test
>
> Perhaps a name could be, click on the link to see the plaintext. This is
> encrypted using my HMAC cipher with the default key, so anybody can
> decrypt it:
>
> http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=48e1a583062ffe45885872914be51a90f14a2e13d25709c46a98139d6a9a9e3aaede18babae8e04878223e91963f91f107c03c163c826322c59e793c0283b27a5a167d0edabd15a53605214e87cc76b1da33c324
>
> ;^)
>
> Btw, check this out:
>
> http://fractallife247.com/fdla
>
> Try clicking around on the canvas...
>
> Also, check this out:
>
> http://fractallife247.com/test/vfield

Chris, how about you calling it "you've been plutoniumized"

Re: 2- Dan Christensen on failed math MIT Gilbert Strang, with his scatterbrained Calculus books, no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, because Gilbert never knew
by Chris M. Thomasson
On 6/25/2021

On 6/25/2021 9:59 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 10:36:21 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 6/25/2021 8:30 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 6/25/2021 4:22 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol.
>>>>> ;^)
>>>>
>>>> No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or
>>>> Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not
>>>> TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd
>>>> thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than
>>>> Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather
>>>> be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, this is why you should create your own calculator program and put
>>> it up online. Right? ;^)
>> Actually, I would be willing to dedicate some space on my site. I can
>> call it "AP's Corner". You program your calculator in JavaScript, and
>> create its GUI using HTML 5, and I just might put it up online. ;^)
>>
>> My site is under development anyway:
>>
>> http://fractallife247.com/test
>>
>> Perhaps a name could be, click on the link to see the plaintext. This is
>> encrypted using my HMAC cipher with the default key, so anybody can
>> decrypt it:
>>
>> http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=48e1a583062ffe45885872914be51a90f14a2e13d25709c46a98139d6a9a9e3aaede18babae8e04878223e91963f91f107c03c163c826322c59e793c0283b27a5a167d0edabd15a53605214e87cc76b1da33c324
>>
>> ;^)
>>
>> Btw, check this out:
>>
>> http://fractallife247.com/fdla
>>
>> Try clicking around on the canvas...
>>
>> Also, check this out:
>>
>> http://fractallife247.com/test/vfield
>
> Chris, how about you calling it "you've been plutoniumized"

That is okay. however, I want you to create a little calculator program
that has a gui, and the code must be in JavaScript.

>
> Re: 2- Dan Christensen on failed math MIT Gilbert Strang, with his scatterbrained Calculus books, no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, because Gilbert never knew
> by Chris M. Thomasson
> On 6/25/2021
>

On Saturday, June 26, 2021 at 1:14:21 AM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 6/25/2021 9:59 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 10:36:21 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> >> On 6/25/2021 8:30 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> >>> On 6/25/2021 4:22 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol.
> >>>>> ;^)
> >>>>
> >>>> No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or
> >>>> Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not
> >>>> TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd
> >>>> thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than
> >>>> Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather
> >>>> be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Well, this is why you should create your own calculator program and put
> >>> it up online. Right? ;^)
> >> Actually, I would be willing to dedicate some space on my site. I can
> >> call it "AP's Corner". You program your calculator in JavaScript, and
> >> create its GUI using HTML 5, and I just might put it up online. ;^)
> >>
> >> My site is under development anyway:
> >>
> >> http://fractallife247.com/test
> >>
> >> Perhaps a name could be, click on the link to see the plaintext. This is
> >> encrypted using my HMAC cipher with the default key, so anybody can
> >> decrypt it:
> >>
> >> http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=48e1a583062ffe45885872914be51a90f14a2e13d25709c46a98139d6a9a9e3aaede18babae8e04878223e91963f91f107c03c163c826322c59e793c0283b27a5a167d0edabd15a53605214e87cc76b1da33c324
> >>
> >> ;^)
> >>
> >> Btw, check this out:
> >>
> >> http://fractallife247.com/fdla
> >>
> >> Try clicking around on the canvas...
> >>
> >> Also, check this out:
> >>
> >> http://fractallife247.com/test/vfield
> >
> > Chris, how about you calling it "you've been plutoniumized"
> That is okay. however, I want you to create a little calculator program
> that has a gui, and the code must be in JavaScript.
> >
> > Re: 2- Dan Christensen on failed math MIT Gilbert Strang, with his scatterbrained Calculus books, no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, because Gilbert never knew
> > by Chris M. Thomasson
> > On 6/25/2021
> >

Get a hold of yourself, I am the King of Science, you think I have time for b.s. programming

On 6/25/2021 11:15 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Saturday, June 26, 2021 at 1:14:21 AM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 6/25/2021 9:59 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 10:36:21 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>> On 6/25/2021 8:30 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>>> On 6/25/2021 4:22 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2021 at 6:09:27 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You should create your own calculator program where 2 OR 1 is not 3.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, your calculator would not show that 2 AND 1 is actually 0. lol.
>>>>>>> ;^)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No wonder Chris failed "how to think properly" with his Either Or.. Or
>>>>>> Both poising as a alternative to a truth table of AND as TTTF, not
>>>>>> TFFF. Chris is bandwagon understanding of life, whatever the crowd
>>>>>> thinks, Chris follows along. But at least, Gilbert is far smarter than
>>>>>> Chris, and Gilbert has a lot to teach the mindless Chris. Now I rather
>>>>>> be bored with a Gilbert, than be subjected to a mindless confused Chris.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, this is why you should create your own calculator program and put
>>>>> it up online. Right? ;^)
>>>> Actually, I would be willing to dedicate some space on my site. I can
>>>> call it "AP's Corner". You program your calculator in JavaScript, and
>>>> create its GUI using HTML 5, and I just might put it up online. ;^)
>>>>
>>>> My site is under development anyway:
>>>>
>>>> http://fractallife247.com/test
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps a name could be, click on the link to see the plaintext. This is
>>>> encrypted using my HMAC cipher with the default key, so anybody can
>>>> decrypt it:
>>>>
>>>> http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=48e1a583062ffe45885872914be51a90f14a2e13d25709c46a98139d6a9a9e3aaede18babae8e04878223e91963f91f107c03c163c826322c59e793c0283b27a5a167d0edabd15a53605214e87cc76b1da33c324
>>>>
>>>> ;^)
>>>>
>>>> Btw, check this out:
>>>>
>>>> http://fractallife247.com/fdla
>>>>
>>>> Try clicking around on the canvas...
>>>>
>>>> Also, check this out:
>>>>
>>>> http://fractallife247.com/test/vfield
>>>
>>> Chris, how about you calling it "you've been plutoniumized"
>> That is okay. however, I want you to create a little calculator program
>> that has a gui, and the code must be in JavaScript.
>>>
>>> Re: 2- Dan Christensen on failed math MIT Gilbert Strang, with his scatterbrained Calculus books, no geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, because Gilbert never knew
>>> by Chris M. Thomasson
>>> On 6/25/2021
>>>
>
> Get a hold of yourself, I am the King of Science, you think I have time for b.s. programming
>

Programming is a nice way for you to put your ideas into a realm that is
able to be used by others.

🐷 of Math and 🐗 of Physics Archimedes "Court Jester of Physics"
Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
> On Saturday, June 26, 2021 at 1:14:21 AM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>> On 6/25/2021 9:59 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

>>> Chris, how about you calling it "you've been plutoniumized"
>> That is okay. however, I want you to create a little calculator program
>> that has a gui, and the code must be in JavaScript.

>
> Get a hold of yourself, I am the King of Science, you think I have time for b.s. programming
>

Translation: Plutonium doesn't have a fucking clue how to even begin to
do such a program, but he will NEVER admit that. Instead he tries to
blow it off claiming he's too important and doesn't have time to do such
things. (yet he has LOADS of time to whine about Google search results,
write up attack posts against me, Dan, math and science greats, and just
about anyone who responds to him, spam his books and otherwise waste his
time on Usenet)

On 6/26/2021 12:12 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 🐷 of Math and 🐗 of Physics Archimedes "Court Jester of Physics"
> Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
>> On Saturday, June 26, 2021 at 1:14:21 AM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 6/25/2021 9:59 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
>>>> Chris, how about you calling it "you've been plutoniumized"
>>> That is okay. however, I want you to create a little calculator program
>>> that has a gui, and the code must be in JavaScript.
>
>
>>
>> Get a hold of yourself, I am the King of Science, you think I have
>> time for b.s. programming
>>
>
> Translation: Plutonium doesn't have a fucking clue how to even begin to
> do such a program, but he will NEVER admit that. Instead he tries to
> blow it off claiming he's too important and doesn't have time to do such
> things. (yet he has LOADS of time to whine about Google search results,
> write up attack posts against me, Dan, math and science greats, and just
> about anyone who responds to him, spam his books and otherwise waste his
> time on Usenet)

Yikes! ;^o

Kibo Parry M. on Dartmouth💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge" Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner, Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble.

No fair balanced physics Google Search lists except for Harvard's Dr. Hau with a Counterpoint on her first page. Others like Steven Weinberg, Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs is sugar coated b.s. of failed physicists who were too dumb to even ask the question,-- which is the atom's real electron, the muon or the 0.5MeV particle.

On Saturday, October 5, 2019 at 6:27:05 PM UTC-5, burs...@gmail.com wrote:
>brain farto is running out of name lists.
> He needs them to ask around, since he is
> desperately searching his weelchair:

No Dartmouth math or physics professor can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor even ask the simple question, which is the real true electron of atoms, is it the muon stuck inside a proton of 840MeV doing the Faraday law inside the proton, or the 0.5MeV particle is it the electron or the Dirac magnetic monopole. With this blight over Dartmouth College, it is a wonder that they even open their doors for a education. Considering they cannot even think straight and clear with their Boole Logic of AND truth table of TFFF when in reality it is TTTF to have 2 AND 1 = 3 and not Dartmouth teaching 2 OR 1 = 3. So is Dartmouth even a school or more like a propaganda camp?

> Michael Moroney's profile photo and is he a paid stalker by NSF paid to stalk 24-7-365
On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 8:24:00 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> fails at math and science:
Michael Moroney wrote
> Jun 20, 2021, 11:11:48 PM
> 
> 💀 of Math and ☠️ of Physics Stooge"
> Michael Moroney's profile photo
> Michael Moroney wrote
> 11:29 AM

On Sunday, June 13, 2021 at 12:55:53 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "FireD your ass"
> >
Dartmouth College: Philip J. Hanlon, Joseph Helble, Asher Auel, Peter Doyle, Anne Gelb, Marcia Groszek, Ethan Levien, Peter J Mucha, Rosa C. Orellana, Scott D. Pauls, Daniel N. Rockmore, Thomas R. Shemanske, John, D Trout, Erik van Erp, John Voight, Dorothy I. Wallace, David L. Webb, Dana P. Williams, Peter Winkler
Miles P. Blencowe, Robert R. Caldwell, Brian Charles Chabover, Richard Denton, Robert A. Fesen, Marcelo Gleiser, Ryan Hickox, Mary K. Hudson, James William LaBelle, Kristina Anne Lynch, Robyn Millan, Hans Mueller, Elisabeth Newton, Roberto Onofrio, Alex Rimberg, Barrett N. Rogers, John R. Thorstensen, Lorenza Viola, Martin N. Wybourne, Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner

On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 1:14:40 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Drag Queen of Science"
> fails at math and scienc

On Saturday, September 5, 2020 at 5:10:28 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Piñata of sci.math and Punching Bag of sci.physics

No Dartmouth math or physics professor can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, nor even ask the simple question, which is the real true electron of atoms, is it the muon stuck inside a proton of 840MeV doing the Faraday law inside the proton, or the 0.5MeV particle is it the electron or the Dirac magnetic monopole. With this blight over Dartmouth College, it is a wonder that they even open their doors for a education. Considering they cannot even think straight and clear with their Boole Logic of AND truth table of TFFF when in reality it is TTTF to have 2 AND 1 = 3 and not Dartmouth teaching 2 OR 1 = 3. So is Dartmouth even a school or more like a propaganda camp?

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)

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

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.

AP started a World Revolution in College textbooks in that students read for free the worlds finest math textbooks available-- containing geometry proofs of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

#4-1, 134th published book

Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.

Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.

Product details
• ASIN : B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date : September 24, 2020
• Language : English
• File size : 576 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 23 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,307,085 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #1,241 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #1,345 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #10,634 in Calculus (Books)
•

#4-2, 45th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

Last revision was 2NOV2020.
Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.

This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.

It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.

Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.

Length: 375 pages

Product details
File Size: 2013 KB
Print Length: 375 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

#4-3, 55th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.

Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.

The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.

And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.

But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.

Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.

The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.

Length: 236 pages

Product details
File Size: 1390 KB
Print Length: 236 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 16, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WN9RVXD
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,212,707 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2719 in Calculus (Books)
#417 in Calculus (Kindle Store)



#4-4, 56th published book

COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

#1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads

This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
Length: 54 pages

Product details
File Size: 1035 KB
Print Length: 64 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#318 in Calculus (Books)
#48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)



Ross, are you saying that Gilbert Strang cannot do a geometry proof of calculus, for he spends most of his time on cleaning his underwear? Or that Gilbert has dirty underwear, and then unable to do proper maths? And that Kibo Parry M. is splatter shitting Gilbert?

On Thursday, July 1, 2021 at 4:25:22 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>Stooge"
> fails at math and science:
>"splatter-fart-shitee"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

Ross wants to know if clean underwear is a prerequisite to attend Dan's math classes at Univ Western Ontario, accounting for Dan's recent outburst of Bend over, er...

Ross, does clean underwear improve the math class experience??

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

Post message
ross.pro...@gmx.com's profile photo
ross.pro...@gmx.com wrote:
Jul 1, 2021, 5:13 PM (1 hour ago)



to

>I thought it was eyebrow raising that in an age of washing machines (or indeed cheap replacement underwear), that AP seems to suggest he regards hand washing skid marks out of undies to be the obviously correct course of action. Personally, I would prefer to keep my arse clean so the problem doesn't arise, but still:
>
>USE A WASHING MACHINE AP!!!!!

Dan Christensen Warning ---> Are you ready, kids??? Bend over, er... > > Dan Christensen 21OCT2019. Dan Christensen has been a nonstop attacking predator of sci.math for approx 10 years now.

This is in reply to Todd B Smith who loves to demonize and defame people by concocting a rigged Google search hit on his "targeted victim". Hopefully this thread will someday appear on the 1st page of a Google Search of Todd B Smith-- that demonizing arsewipe.

Todd B Smith, splatter-fart-shitter of demonizing Google Search hits. Todd victimizes innocent people by concocting Google hits. Hopefully this thread will appear on 1st page of Todd B Smith.

...
..- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
..' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
.. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
.. ' ` `. |
.. '. '
.. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
..' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am Todd B Smith whose aim in life is to design a splatter fart shit as your Google Search Hit, on your very first page. I trained under the master Swiss fart-shitter Jan Burse. We design obnoxious, demonizing, defaming Google Search hits that land on the 1st page of you intended victim. Contact me, Todd for a price on your splatter fart shit Google Search hit, custom designed.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
....'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

Archimedes Plutonium - Example Problems
http://www.exampleproblems.com › wiki › index.php
http://www.exampleproblems.com › wiki › index.php

Archimedes Plutonium (born July 5, 1950) is primarily noted for his varied and eccentric contributions to Usenet. Plutonium repeatedly claimed to be the greatest ...
Background · ‎Plutonium's claims · ‎Plutonium's assessment... · ‎Biographical notes

Todd B Smith on Kibo Parry Moroney by wicked-wikki your free wicked encyclopedia// although he is almost universally regarded as a mRNA poofster fuckdog and Todd B Smith as a adjuvant poofster fuckdog.

...although he is almost universally regarded as a mRNA poofster fuckdog and Todd B Smith as a adjuvant poofster fuckdog.

On Friday, June 14, 2019 at 6:59:05 PM UTC-5, j4n bur53 wrote:
> brain farto, do we have some primes:

On Monday, June 10, 2019 at 7:14:02 PM UTC-5, j4n bur53 wrote:
> brain farto claims 22699 is a Sierpiński number.
>

wiki, wiki Revision history of " James Kibo Parry Moroney"
www.exampleproblems dot com wiki
(cur | prev) 03:21, 13 March 2021 Todd (talk | contribs ... (10,274 bytes)
ep@toddbsmith dot com

Todd B Smith on Kibo Parry Moroney by wicked-wikki your free wicked encyclopedia// although he is almost universally regarded as a mRNA poofster fuckdog and Todd B Smith as a adjuvant poofster fuckdog.

James Kibo Parry Moroney - Example Problems from www.exampleproblems dot com
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
James Kibo Parry Moroney (born July 13, 1967) is primarily noted for his varied and eccentric contributions to Usenet. Given Kibo's birth may explain his stalking in sci.math and sci.physics for he was not born in the normal manner but shitted out of the arse of his mother, while she was undergoing a lobotomy in Boston. And to this very day, Kibo is never seen giving a kind word to anybody or anything, especially his mother. Having been shitted out of the arse of your mother will do that to you. Kibo Parry Moroney repeatedly claimed to be the greatest living Comic, and referred to himself at least once as "The AnalButtFuckManure of late night comedy"[1], although he is almost universally regarded as a mRNA poofster fuckdog and Todd B Smith as a adjuvant poofster fuckdog. Much to the disdain and annoyance of every lady walking and sitting on benches in the public with a leg exposed. One of Kibo's seminal and most memorable posts in July, 2020 [2] replies to the South Korean Prime Minister over the torture of his country-- moon bears. Bears that are lifelong caged and tortured for their bile extraction. In one of Kibo's posts, he suggests sending in a platoon of Marines to free the moon bears. (Needs confirmation by Todd B. Smith dot com)

|| Criminal and eccentric personalities || Unusual Personalities || Twilight Zone Sickfucks ||

Buck Futter
Re: Kibo Parry Moroney is sending South Korean president Moon Jae-in a map to free the MOON BEARS from torture
On Wednesday, July 22, 2020 at 8:05:47 PM UTC-5, Buck Futter wrote: > Give it a rest you impotent
10:20 AM

Another report of Kibo Parry Moroney is in answer to Dr. Tao of why he cannot admit to his mistakes that a ellipse is not a conic cut of a single cone for that is a oval. And why Dr. Tao fails to ever give a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, like what the King of Science Archimedes Plutonium, did in 2015, and published the world's first geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney says of Dr. Tao "ant of Math" and a pandemic shit mule// Perhaps because Dr. Tao is such a failure of math, he believed primes are real when Naturals have no division-- and failures of math overlook even the most obvious
Professor Wordsmith Jul 25, 2020, 8:23:21

Another memorable report and post by Kibo Parry Moroney is where he refers to Stanford Univ president Dr. Tessier-Lavigne and Caltech's president Dr. Rosenbaum as "cults of education" for never considering that the real proton is 840MeV as a proton torus with the muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law that AP wrote a book on.

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney says "Oh Mum! Ride-A-Penis Cult!" Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne, CalTech's Thomas Rosenbaum with their 10 OR 6 = 16; their ellipse a conic when it never was; their proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV when in truth it is 840 to..
Eddie "Fish Basket" Reynolds Jr. Aug 10, 2020, 3:34:45 PM

Here is where the 28 year long stalker Kibo Parry Moroney with his gang of bullies such as Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, et al beat up on Harvard's Dr. Hau for failing to turn the light switch off in "Slow Light Experiments" and demonstrate AP is correct in saying light waves are not straightline arrows but are closed loops with the source always in contact in the closed loop.

Re: Zelos asks why Harvard's Dr. Hau wants to fail in physics, by not turning off the light to see if light wave is a closed loop pencil ellipse that AP predicts. Is Dr.Hau stubborn and too ignorant to finish her experiment??
Michael Moroney Jan 18, 2021, 2:06:24 PM

**new**
Re: Fire the entire Cornell Univ math dept-- unable to even teach Add in Logic is not OR but rather is AND
1508 views
by Dan Christensen
Nov 9, 2017, 3:00:47 PM

Contents
1 Background
2 Kibo's claims
2.1 Kibo's assessment of his poofster stalking in sci.math, sci.physics
3 Biographical notes
4 Quotes
5 External links

|| Eccentric believers || Govt. paid for and sponsored stalkers || Poofsters UWO University earning B.A. Masters, and Ph.D in Stalking, president Kibo Parry Moroney 28 year veteran, chancellor Dan Christensen, floor and toilet bowl cleaner Jan Burse

....although Kibo _universally regarded_ as having more physics intelligence in his shit streaked underwear than in the entire brain of Todd B Smith

Dan Christensen on Donna Strickland, no physics wit to ask the question, which is the atom's real true electron, the muon or 0.5MeV particle, no physics intelligence in Donna, for AP says the muon is the real electron inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law, while 0.5MeV is Dirac's magnetic monopole.
On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 9:06:24 AM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
> Insanely jealous psycho troll,
>
> WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't be a victim of

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.

1st page of Google Search list on "Gilbert Strang" should have this thread as his CounterPoint, for the failure of mathematics Gilbert Strang is oblivious to the idea calculus is geometry and the failure Gilbert is unaware that a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is demanded of him. Rather than him selling more of his junk and fake math calculus books feeding on innocent young students with Gilberts --illogical one marbled math---..

MATHOPEDIA-- Listing of 70 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. AP's 174th book.

Last revision was 28JUN2021.

Preface: I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds question of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).

Some of these can be found in AP's TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS series, but the entries keep changing and added on new, means I need to have a separate book for these fakes, mistakes and errors of Old Math.

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for ages 18-19 Freshperson College, math textbook series, book 3
Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
Listing the Errors of Old Math, list of 1 to 50.

Alright, well, mathematics is a closed subject. What I mean by that is due to the textbook series of Archimedes Plutonium TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, that once you learn the polynomial transform and learn the two Power Rules of Calculus, you reached the peak, the pinnacle of all of mathematics, and anything further in math is just details of what you learn in that textbook series. Math is a completed science because it has this "peak of calculus", unlike the other 5 hard sciences of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy. Those other five will continue to find new ideas, new things, while math remains static and complete to its peak of calculus understanding. Mathematics is finished complete as far as a science goes because the peak of math is going nowhere. And even though Physics will find new science such as how the proton toruses inside of atoms are configured in geometry, the geometry and calculus used in that configuration, that new science does not change nor does it create or require a new math peak/summit to handle the new physics.

Now I do need to discuss the Errors of Math in General and the errors of math in geometry in particular. I have the feeling that Geometry is the more important of the two-- algebra - geometry. This list appears in most of AP's Teaching True Mathematics textbook series by Archimedes Plutonium, meant to be a guide and orientation, and a organizing of what must be covered before graduating from College, and what math to steer clear of.

Errors mostly, but not always, for some are included because too much time spent on them.

The listings in Mathopedia of errors, mistakes and fakes is based on the idea that Calculus is the supreme achievement of all of mathematics for it is the essential math of doing Physics electricity and magnetism. And in order to have a proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, we must clean up and clean out all the mistakes, fakes and errors of Old Math, erst, we have no Calculus. So calculus is the consistency maker for the rest of all of mathematics.

1) Calculus requires a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, a proof that derivative and integral are inverses of one another, just as addition and subtraction are inverses, or, multiplication and division are inverses. The only way to obtain a geometry proof is to clean up and clean out all the fakes, mistakes and errors of Old Math, such as their fake numbers-- the Reals. Their fake definition of function allowing anything be a function. Their fakery of a continuum when even physics by 1900 with Planck onwards in Quantum Mechanics proving the Universe is discrete Space not a continuum, yet by 1900 onwards those in mathematics following the idiotic continuum in the Continuum Hypothesis with even more avid interest, when they should have thrown the continuum on a trashpile of shame.

2) The true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers, because you have to need and apply one mechanism only to obtain the true numbers of mathematics-- Mathematical Induction. In Old Math they had just a tiny few intelligent mathematicians, Kronecker, who emerged from the gaggle crowd of kooks to notice that Naturals all come from one single mechanism-- Mathematical Induction. But Old Math never had a crowd of mathematicians with logical brains to say-- all our numbers need to come from the one mechanism of Mathematical Induction.

3) The true numbers of math have empty space between successor and predecessor numbers. For example the 10 Grid is 0, .1, .2, .3, . . . , 9.8, 9.9, 10..0. Where no numbers exist between .1 and .2, etc. Only discrete numbers allow us to give a proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

4) All functions of mathematics must be a polynomial, and if not a polynomial, convert the offering to a polynomial over a specific interval.

5) Space is discrete and all lines in space are strings of attached straight lines.

6) No curves exist in Geometry, only finer and smaller straight line segments attached to one another.
We can still keep the name "curve" as long as we know it is a string of fine tiny straightline segments strung together in what looks like a smooth curve. If curves exist, then the Calculus in Fundamental Theorem of Calculus cannot be proven and thus Calculus does not exist. We all know that we have to have Calculus, and so we throw out onto the trash pile the curve of Old Math. And this is reasonable because starting in 1900 in physics there arose the Quantum Mechanics of Space being discrete. And a discrete space has no continuum, has no curve of Old Math.

7) Space has gaps in between one point and the next point. These gaps are empty space from one point to the next point, for example in 10 Grid there is no number between .1 and .2, and in 100 Grid there exists no number between .01 and .02.

8) Limit analysis was an insane fakery in Old Math, concocted because Old Math needed the excuse of some proof, so they invented the monster con-artist trick that a limit analysis would divert the fact it is no proof at all, but a Non Sequitur argument. Limit analysis is juju totem witchcraft dance around a desire to prove the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Just as idiotic as dancing around a sick person of a virus is going to cure the person.

9) Infinity has a borderline and there is a microinfinity compared to a macroinfinity. For example in 10 Grid, the microinfinity is .1 if we exclude 0 and so there is no number smaller than .1 and no number larger than 10 in 10 Grid, where 10 is macroinfinity.

10) The 1st Quadrant Only in Coordinate System Geometry. Sad that the first coordinate system of Descartes was correct but soon became corrupted with 4 quadrants. See Mathematical Thought, Volume 1, Kline, 1972, page 303. Where Fermat then Descartes starts the Cartesian Coordinate System as 1 axis only and from 0 rightwards, meaning in our modern day math, 1st Quadrant Only. Why did math screw up on coordinate systems? I suppose some clowns thought negative numbers were true and they wanted ease of drawing a circle with center at 0. When they could have just as easily drawn the circle in 1st Quadrant Only.

11) Calculus needed a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Old Math never provided such, instead they provided some stupid Limit argument. The reason for the creation of the Limit disaster was that the French mathematician Cauchy got sick and tired of hearing his smartest students complain that the width of rectangles in the integral are 0 width, and those smart students could not, for the life of them understand how a rectangle with 0 width has any interior area. So instead of the math community denouncing the limit, instead they elevated the fakery.

12) Further in Calculus, they knew you could do a transform of coordinate points to turn any function into a polynomial function, a method of Lagrange.. However, they in Old Math were too stupid to take this transform to its highest form-- all functions are polynomial functions and only polynomial functions. When you learn that-- the derivative and integral of any and every function of math is a snap breeze simple and easy.

13) With the error filled 4 quadrants, when it should be 1st Quadrant Only, we have Trigonometry's sine and cosine with the fakery of sinusoid wave when it never was that. The sine and cosine are semicircle waves, and no sinusoid wave exists.

14) There is only one Geometry-- Euclidean, and there is not three distinct geometries of elliptical Riemannian or hyperbolic Lobachevsky. Those two are just duals that make up Euclidean.

15) Torus, volume and surface area formulas in Old Math are all screwed up and in error because they imagined bending a cylinder to form a torus. This brings back memories, for I had to do a percentage formula, since I could not follow the fake way of bending a cylinder. Where 78.5% of Disc Torus (pi)R^2h - (pi)r^2h is the volume of Circle Torus, and 78.5% of Disc Torus 2(pi)Rh + 2(pi)rh + 2 ((pi)R^2 - (pi)r^2) is the surface area of Circle Torus..

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 5:08:08 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> Gotta love dry lightning...

Kibo Parry M. asks how many more years before someone at MIT can do a geometry proof of Calculus Fundamental Theorem-- 50 years, 100? Maybe a 1000 years it will take for a MIT math professor can do a geometry proof of FTC.

Perhaps asking Gilbert Strang why MIT is so far behind the 8 ball? Is it that no-one ever heard of Logic at MIT? We know Harvard knows some logic for they had Charles Sanders Peirce.

So, Gilbert, the onus is on you and MIT, and will you take 200 years before you figure out that Calculus is geometry and FTC needs a geometry proof? Or are you going to write another scatterbrain textbook on Calculus where you never define-- what the hell are the numbers you use, but define Complex number on page 360? If I were you Gilbert, I would have a recall of that textbook.

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)

MATHOPEDIA-- List of 72 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. AP's 174th book.

Last revision was 2Aug2021. The concept of vector is part of the unit concept and the derivative concept. So vector is duplicity.

Preface: I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds question of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).

Some of these can be found in AP's TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS series, but the entries keep changing and added on new, means I need to have a separate book for these fakes, mistakes and errors of Old Math.

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for ages 18-19 Freshperson College, math textbook series, book 3
Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
Listing the Errors of Old Math, list of 1 to 50.

Alright, well, mathematics is a closed subject. What I mean by that is due to the textbook series of Archimedes Plutonium TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, that once you learn the polynomial transform and learn the two Power Rules of Calculus, you reached the peak, the pinnacle of all of mathematics, and anything further in math is just details of what you learn in that textbook series. Math is a completed science because it has this "peak of calculus", unlike the other 5 hard sciences of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy. Those other five will continue to find new ideas, new things, while math remains static and complete to its peak of calculus understanding. Mathematics is finished complete as far as a science goes because the peak of math is going nowhere. And even though Physics will find new science such as how the proton toruses inside of atoms are configured in geometry, the geometry and calculus used in that configuration, that new science does not change nor does it create or require a new math peak/summit to handle the new physics.

Now I do need to discuss the Errors of Math in General and the errors of math in geometry in particular. I have the feeling that Geometry is the more important of the two-- algebra - geometry. This list appears in most of AP's Teaching True Mathematics textbook series by Archimedes Plutonium, meant to be a guide and orientation, and a organizing of what must be covered before graduating from College, and what math to steer clear of.

Errors mostly, but not always, for some are included because too much time spent on them.

The listings in Mathopedia of errors, mistakes and fakes is based on the idea that Calculus is the supreme achievement of all of mathematics for it is the essential math of doing Physics electricity and magnetism. And in order to have a proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, we must clean up and clean out all the mistakes, fakes and errors of Old Math, erst, we have no Calculus. So calculus is the consistency maker for the rest of all of mathematics.

1) Calculus requires a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, a proof that derivative and integral are inverses of one another, just as addition and subtraction are inverses, or, multiplication and division are inverses. The only way to obtain a geometry proof is to clean up and clean out all the fakes, mistakes and errors of Old Math, such as their fake numbers-- the Reals. Their fake definition of function allowing anything be a function. Their fakery of a continuum when even physics by 1900 with Planck onwards in Quantum Mechanics proving the Universe is discrete Space not a continuum, yet by 1900 onwards those in mathematics following the idiotic continuum in the Continuum Hypothesis with even more avid interest, when they should have thrown the continuum on a trashpile of shame.

2) The true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers, because you have to need and apply one mechanism only to obtain the true numbers of mathematics-- Mathematical Induction. In Old Math they had just a tiny few intelligent mathematicians, Kronecker, who emerged from the gaggle crowd of kooks to notice that Naturals all come from one single mechanism-- Mathematical Induction. But Old Math never had a crowd of mathematicians with logical brains to say-- all our numbers need to come from the one mechanism of Mathematical Induction.

3) The true numbers of math have empty space between successor and predecessor numbers. For example the 10 Grid is 0, .1, .2, .3, . . . , 9.8, 9.9, 10..0. Where no numbers exist between .1 and .2, etc. Only discrete numbers allow us to give a proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

4) All functions of mathematics must be a polynomial, and if not a polynomial, convert the offering to a polynomial over a specific interval.

5) Space is discrete and all lines in space are strings of attached straight lines.

6) No curves exist in Geometry, only finer and smaller straight line segments attached to one another.
We can still keep the name "curve" as long as we know it is a string of fine tiny straightline segments strung together in what looks like a smooth curve. If curves exist, then the Calculus in Fundamental Theorem of Calculus cannot be proven and thus Calculus does not exist. We all know that we have to have Calculus, and so we throw out onto the trash pile the curve of Old Math. And this is reasonable because starting in 1900 in physics there arose the Quantum Mechanics of Space being discrete. And a discrete space has no continuum, has no curve of Old Math.

7) Space has gaps in between one point and the next point. These gaps are empty space from one point to the next point, for example in 10 Grid there is no number between .1 and .2, and in 100 Grid there exists no number between .01 and .02.

8) Limit analysis was an insane fakery in Old Math, concocted because Old Math needed the excuse of some proof, so they invented the monster con-artist trick that a limit analysis would divert the fact it is no proof at all, but a Non Sequitur argument. Limit analysis is juju totem witchcraft dance around a desire to prove the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Just as idiotic as dancing around a sick person of a virus is going to cure the person.

9) Infinity has a borderline and there is a microinfinity compared to a macroinfinity. For example in 10 Grid, the microinfinity is .1 if we exclude 0 and so there is no number smaller than .1 and no number larger than 10 in 10 Grid, where 10 is macroinfinity.

10) The 1st Quadrant Only in Coordinate System Geometry. Sad that the first coordinate system of Descartes was correct but soon became corrupted with 4 quadrants. See Mathematical Thought, Volume 1, Kline, 1972, page 303. Where Fermat then Descartes starts the Cartesian Coordinate System as 1 axis only and from 0 rightwards, meaning in our modern day math, 1st Quadrant Only. Why did math screw up on coordinate systems? I suppose some clowns thought negative numbers were true and they wanted ease of drawing a circle with center at 0. When they could have just as easily drawn the circle in 1st Quadrant Only.

11) Calculus needed a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Old Math never provided such, instead they provided some stupid Limit argument. The reason for the creation of the Limit disaster was that the French mathematician Cauchy got sick and tired of hearing his smartest students complain that the width of rectangles in the integral are 0 width, and those smart students could not, for the life of them understand how a rectangle with 0 width has any interior area. So instead of the math community denouncing the limit, instead they elevated the fakery.

12) Further in Calculus, they knew you could do a transform of coordinate points to turn any function into a polynomial function, a method of Lagrange.. However, they in Old Math were too stupid to take this transform to its highest form-- all functions are polynomial functions and only polynomial functions. When you learn that-- the derivative and integral of any and every function of math is a snap breeze simple and easy.

13) With the error filled 4 quadrants, when it should be 1st Quadrant Only, we have Trigonometry's sine and cosine with the fakery of sinusoid wave when it never was that. The sine and cosine are semicircle waves, and no sinusoid wave exists.

14) There is only one Geometry-- Euclidean, and there is not three distinct geometries of elliptical Riemannian or hyperbolic Lobachevsky. Those two are just duals that make up Euclidean.

15) Torus, volume and surface area formulas in Old Math are all screwed up and in error because they imagined bending a cylinder to form a torus. This brings back memories, for I had to do a percentage formula, since I could not follow the fake way of bending a cylinder. Where 78.5% of Disc Torus (pi)R^2h - (pi)r^2h is the volume of Circle Torus, and 78.5% of Disc Torus 2(pi)Rh + 2(pi)rh + 2 ((pi)R^2 - (pi)r^2) is the surface area of Circle Torus..

16) Ellipse is never a single cone slant cut, always a cylinder slant cut. Although you do get an ellipse from double cones of this configuration <> which in Old Math was the hyperbola, but two hyperbolas joined together to form a ellipse.

17) All Parallelepipeds reduced to a Rectangular Box by making 2 cuts and pastes. Volume of the original Parallelepiped is simply a*b*c of the Rectangular Box length*width*depth formed. Old Math never understood that a precise definition of Parallelepiped has two kinds, the parallelepiped that has 90 degree angles and the parallelepiped that has no 90 degree angle.

🤮 of Math and 💩 of Physics Archimedes "Splitter-Splatter-Fart-Shittee"
Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> tarded:

> MATHOPEDIA-- List of 72 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. AP's 174th book.

1) Ludwig Poehlmann
2) Ludwig Hansen
3) Ludwig van Ludvig
4) Ludwig Plutonium
5) Archimedes Plutonium
6) Archimedes Plutonium
....
72) Archimedes Plutonium

AP requires the entire MIT math dept especially Gilbert Strang to publish in the student newspaper en-masse that they now see the light of day on the conic section, the truth about slant cut of single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse, for a single cone has but one axis of symmetry, yet a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry.

Rush MIT math dept to publish that you apologize for being bozo the clowns of mathematics, never noticing that you need 2 axes of symmetry to get a ellipse.

A cylinder at slant cut provides a ellipse. And some slant cuts in 2 cones configured as such <> form ellipses. But a single cone by itself is never a ellipse at slant cut.

So, rush to the student newspaper on MIT campus and apologize to all the students you brainwashed and polluted in mind with your mindless geometry of memorization, but never any close and careful study.

MIT math dept. (are they more clowns than actual math teachers of the truth of mathematics?)

Michael Artin, Martin Bazant, Bonnie Berger, Roman Bezrukavnikov, Alexei Borodin, John Bush, Herman Chernoff, Henry Cohn, Laurent Demanet, Richard Dudley, Jörn Dunkel, Alan Edelman, Pavel Etingof, Daniel Freedman, Michel Goemans, Vadim Gorin, Harvey Greenspan, Victor Guillemin, Larry Guth, Sigurdur Helgason, Anette Hosoi, David Jerison, Steven Johnson, Victor Kac, Steven Kleiman, Daniel Kleitman,
Andrew Lawrie, Tom Leighton, George Lusztig, Arthur Mattuck, Davesh Maulik, Richard Melrose, Haynes Miller, William Minicozzi, Ankur Moitra, Elchanan Mossel, Tomasz Mrowka, James Munkres, Andrei Negut, Aaron Pixton, Bjorn Poonen, Alexander Postnikov, Philippe Rigollet, Rodolfo Rosales, Giulia Saccà, Gerald Sacks, Paul Seidel, Scott Sheffield, Peter Shor, Isadore Singer, Michael Sipser, Jared Speck, Gigliola Staffilani, Richard Stanley, Harold Stark, Gilbert Strang, Daniel Stroock, Goncalo Tabuada, Alar Toomre, David Vogan

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.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 11, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 20 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
•
•

#11-2, 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 15Dec2021. 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". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.

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.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQTNHMY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 14, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 154 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)

#11-3, 24th published book

World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.

Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07NMV8NQQ
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 20, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1241 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

#11-4, 28th published book

World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.

Cover picture: Shows four countries colored yellow, red, green, purple and all four are mutually adjacent. And where the Purple colored country is landlocked, so that if it were considered that a 5th color is needed, that 5th color should be purple, hence, 4 colors are sufficient.

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

When will you learn, Archie Poo???

On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 11:39:29 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> AP requires the entire...

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

In AP's OWN WORDS here:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Which could explain...

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

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

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

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

"Please--Asking for help from Russia-- russian robots-- to create a new, true mathematics [sic]. What I like for the robots to do, is list every day, about 4 Colleges ( of the West) math dept, and ask why that math department is teaching false and fake math, and if unable to change to the correct true math, well, simply fire that math department until they can find professors who recognize truth in math from fakery...."
--November 9, 2017

And if that wasn't weird enough...

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

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

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

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

Dan

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

AP requires the entire MIT math dept especially Gilbert Strang to publish in the student newspaper en-masse that they now see the light of day on the conic section, the truth about slant cut of single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse, for a single cone has but one axis of symmetry, yet a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry.

Rush MIT math dept to publish that you apologize for being bozo the clowns of mathematics, never noticing that you need 2 axes of symmetry to get a ellipse.

A cylinder at slant cut provides a ellipse. And some slant cuts in 2 cones configured as such <> form ellipses. But a single cone by itself is never a ellipse at slant cut.

So, rush to the student newspaper on MIT campus and apologize to all the students you brainwashed and polluted in mind with your mindless geometry of memorization, but never any close and careful study.

MIT math dept. (are they more clowns than actual math teachers of the truth of mathematics?)

Michael Artin, Martin Bazant, Bonnie Berger, Roman Bezrukavnikov, Alexei Borodin, John Bush, Herman Chernoff, Henry Cohn, Laurent Demanet, Richard Dudley, Jörn Dunkel, Alan Edelman, Pavel Etingof, Daniel Freedman, Michel Goemans, Vadim Gorin, Harvey Greenspan, Victor Guillemin, Larry Guth, Sigurdur Helgason, Anette Hosoi, David Jerison, Steven Johnson, Victor Kac, Steven Kleiman, Daniel Kleitman,
Andrew Lawrie, Tom Leighton, George Lusztig, Arthur Mattuck, Davesh Maulik, Richard Melrose, Haynes Miller, William Minicozzi, Ankur Moitra, Elchanan Mossel, Tomasz Mrowka, James Munkres, Andrei Negut, Aaron Pixton, Bjorn Poonen, Alexander Postnikov, Philippe Rigollet, Rodolfo Rosales, Giulia Saccà, Gerald Sacks, Paul Seidel, Scott Sheffield, Peter Shor, Isadore Singer, Michael Sipser, Jared Speck, Gigliola Staffilani, Richard Stanley, Harold Stark, Gilbert Strang, Daniel Stroock, Goncalo Tabuada, Alar Toomre, David Vogan

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.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 11, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 20 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
•
•

#11-2, 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 15Dec2021. 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". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.

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.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQTNHMY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 14, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 154 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)

#11-3, 24th published book

World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.

Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07NMV8NQQ
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 20, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1241 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

#11-4, 28th published book

World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.

Cover picture: Shows four countries colored yellow, red, green, purple and all four are mutually adjacent. And where the Purple colored country is landlocked, so that if it were considered that a 5th color is needed, that 5th color should be purple, hence, 4 colors are sufficient.

🤡 of Math and 🃏 of Physics Archimedes "Bozo of Math" Plutonium
<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails at math and science:

> AP requires the entire MIT math dept especially Gilbert Strang to publish in the student newspaper en-masse

And who the hell does AP think he is, to "require" anything from MIT?
"Require" implies some sort of authority which AP doesn't have, and
never will have, of course. AP remains a failed nobody of math and
doesn't even know how to prove anything in math. The MIT math
department's janitor has forgotten more math than AP can ever know
during his lifetime.

> that they now see the light of day on the conic section, the truth about slant cut of single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse,

How would they see "the light of day" on something mathematically proven
to be false?

> for a single cone has but one axis of symmetry, yet a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry.

And the ellipse formed by a cone/plane intersection doesn't have its
center along the axis of a cone, which is why two axes of symmetry
doesn't apply to it.

> Rush MIT math dept to publish that you apologize for being bozo the clowns of mathematics,

Nothing is about to make their math department "apologize" for teaching
something that is true.

> never noticing that you need 2 axes of symmetry to get a ellipse.

The ellipse formed by cutting a cone *does* have two axes of symmetry.
It simply doesn't lie on the center axis of the cone itself.
>
> A cylinder at slant cut provides a ellipse.

You got something correct for once!

[snip crap]

> AP, Drag Queen of Science, especially Physics

p.s. In case you need a reminder, here's a mathematical proof for you.

From: qbwrfmlx@gmail.com

Here is a plane and cone
x + 1 = z
and
2*x^2 + 2*y^2 = z^2

Square the first equation giving us
x^2 + 2*x + 1 = z^2

In the second equation replace z^2 with x^2 + 2*x + 1 giving us
2*x^2 + 2*y^2 = x^2 + 2*x + 1

Subtract x^2 + 2*x - 1 from both sides giving us
x^2 - 2*x + 1 + 2*y^2 = 2

Replace x^2 - 2*x + 1 with (x-1)^2 giving us
(x-1)^2 + 2*y^2 = 2

That is EXACTLY the equation of an ellipse
And there are two planes of symmetry.

No matter how you tilt or rotate an ellipse it
REMAINS an ellipse and has TWO PLANES of symmetry,
just like the intersection of a plane and cylinder
remains an ellipse no matter what the slope of the
plane is.