Kibo Parry M on John Stillwell Univ San Francisco
On Sunday, March 6, 2022 at 11:20:06 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"single marble illogical brain"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
>of Math and of Physics
>"Kim Jong Un's stooge"
> "Ludicrous Hemp Inmate".

Why Kibo? Because John Stillwell is bozo the clown on slant cut in single cone is a OVAL never the ellipse?

#3-1, 2nd published book

True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of 0.5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is everywhere.

Cover picture: shows 3 isomers of CO2 and the O2 molecule.

Length: 1150 pages

Product details
• File Size : 2167 KB
• ASIN : B07PLVMMSZ
• Publication Date : March 11, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 1150 pages
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,212 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#181 in General Chemistry & Reference
#1324 in General Chemistry
#1656 in Physics (Kindle Store)

#3-2, 50th published book

Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.

Length: 134 pages

Product details
Print Length : 134 pages
Publication Date : June 21, 2019
Word Wise : Enabled
ASIN : B07TCVBD93
File Size : 1308 KB
Language: : English
Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
Simultaneous Device Usage : Unlimited
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Lending : Enabled



#3-3, 81st published book

Animal-CO2 of the 3 CO2 isomers// Chemistry Series, book 3
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

CO2 molecule has 3 isomers. An isomer means same chemical formula but different geometries. The 3 isomers of CO2 come from fire-CO2 and animal-CO2. The fire-CO2 has the carbon atom as central in the molecule and one of the oxygen atoms has a unshared dipole. The animal-CO2 has the carbon atom on the periphery with an unshared dipole.
This is very important chemistry science for it impacts Global Warming but also hugely impacts biology because plants can only live on animal-CO2 and the fire-CO2 is a toxic poison to plants, much like CO is a toxic poison to animals.

Here we learn new facts about the molecules CO, N2, CO2, O2 and even H2O, new facts we never understood before, all because the real electron is the muon stuck inside a proton doing the Faraday Law and that chemical bonding is governed not by electrons but by Dirac magnetic monopoles, and that makes the Lewis structure be based on 6 not 8.

New concepts in chemistry: Lewis structure based on 6, not 8, and the unshared dipole. For a Lewis Structure based on 6, not 8, is the only logical way that the strongest bonded molecules end up being CO and N2. With a Lewis 8 Structure, the strongest bonded molecules, by logic, note, by logic would have to be O2 and FH or possibly FB. However, the proof is that bond dissociation energy of CO is the highest, proving Lewis 6 Structure is the true structure of Chemistry.

source: chem.ucsb.edu

in kJ/mol

CO 1076
N2 946
CO2 532
O2 498
C2 as in diamond is 602 kJ/mol
H2O = 492
OH = 425
H2 = 432

Cover Picture is a winter stored potted clover that I am experimenting with and shows a animal-CO2 molecule going in, and going out is a O2 molecule that animals need to breathe.
Length: 15 pages

Product details
ASIN : B084217LB9
Publication date : January 19, 2020
Language : English
File size : 1042 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Enabled
Print length : 15 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #277,873 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #9 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #52 in General Chemistry & Reference
◦ #297 in Biology (Kindle Store)

#3-4, 38th published book

Hypothesis that Tar restores the Iron in Rust, back to the iron metal object// Chemistry series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Back in 2003 I noticed that while working on my roof, that when I pulled off tar on steel, that the steel was shiny bright iron with no rust while all around where no tar was, was much rust. So that started me to think whether tar acts as a chemical reaction in which it takes the iron atoms out of rust and places those iron-atoms-back-into-the-iron-object. Now that was 2003, and I have not had much time to really dive into experiments on this topic. For one reason-- I have to wait years for the tar to dissolve the rust and perhaps return the iron from iron oxide back into the original iron object. No, I do not have years and I was far too busy with other items of science. But now I plan to do more on this subject. Especially since in 2017 I discovered the real electron of atoms is the muon at 105MeV and real proton is 840MeV, casting brand new light on chemistry and chemical reactions. The iron rust molecule Fe2O3 in New Chemistry where the .5MeV particle is not the electron but is Dirac's magnetic monopole, has to be reviewed in terms of this new found knowledge, and whether or not, tar can return the Fe2 back to the original metal object.

Picture cover: About 5 years ago this hammer and trowel were both iron rusted surfaces, both had iron rust, the trowel worse than the hammer. I put tar on the trowel rusty surface and today with a chisel removed some tar and see the shiny bright iron surface. I suppose if I had coated the hammer back then when I coated the trowel, the hammer would also be bright shiny iron.. So the tar must have done something to not only remove the rust but restore the trowel to "more iron bright shiny surface", some claim (see below in text) that the tar only lifted the rust off the iron surface. I think there is more to it than just adhesion lift, and am thinking the tar takes the iron atoms out of iron oxide and puts the iron atoms back into the original iron object. So this is not a proof by any means, but a hypothesis, and a request for more research.
Length: 32 pages

File Size: 2655 KB
Print Length: 32 pages
Publication Date: April 9, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QK428KN

#3-5, 119th published book

Research Notebook of AP on True Chemistry Periodic Table of Elements based on 6, not the error-filled table of Old Chemistry, Chemistry Series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

In 2016-2017, AP discovered that the real true electron of atoms was the muon and this muon is stuck inside its attendant proton. The muon is of 105MeV while the proton is 840 MeV. The particle that JJ Thomson in 1897 discovered was not the electron of atoms but instead was the Dirac magnetic monopole. Such a huge huge mistake throughout all of chemistry and physics, to think the electron was 0.5MeV orbiting around a proton of 938MeV breaks even the angular momentum concept of physics, for no hydrogen atom can exist with a 0.5 MeV particle traveling almost the speed of light around a 938MeV particle just will not stay together. And besides, in that Bohr-Rutherford model of the atom, their subatomic particles have no function, no job, no task, nothing. In that viewpoint of the atom, there is little wonder that their Table of Elements would be mostly error after error after mistake.
Length: 108 pages

Product details
File Size: 1083 KB
Print Length: 108 pages
Publication Date: May 21, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B0891TTP29
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 



#3-6, 123rd published book

World's first logical teaching of 6.*10^23, Avogadro's number and "mole"; refurbished with "hyasys" as 6.18*10^23 // Chemistry series, book 6
Kindle Edition

måndag 7 mars 2022 kl. 21:15:42 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> I want to suck John Gabriels cock

We know you're homosexual, why do you need to tell us?

Zelos, did you point out to John Stillwell a single cone has 1 axis of symmetry not 2 and so the slant cut is a Oval, never the Ellipse, and he still got it wrong?
On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 7:24:59 AM UTC-5, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> all still fucking wrong

On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 6:27:45 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> why would one need to do it geometrically?

Zelos Malum, did you point out to John Stillwell that calculus is geometry, and a geometric proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is demanded, yet he still is too dumb to do one.

On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:19:30 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> We know you're homosexual, why do you need to tell us?

onsdag 16 mars 2022 kl. 13:46:23 UTC+1 skrev Archimedes Plutonium:
> Zelos, did you point out to John Stillwell a single cone has 1 axis of symmetry not 2 and so the slant cut is a Oval, never the Ellipse, and he still got it wrong?
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 7:24:59 AM UTC-5, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > all still fucking wrong
>
> On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 6:27:45 AM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > why would one need to do it geometrically?
>
> Zelos Malum, did you point out to John Stillwell that calculus is geometry, and a geometric proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is demanded, yet he still is too dumb to do one.
> On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 11:19:30 PM UTC-6, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> > We know you're homosexual, why do you need to tell us?
calculus is not geometry, so you are 100% fucking wrong, as awlways.