Philip Hanlon was a math teacher but failed that and then Dartmouth installed him as President of Dartmouth College, to give him a chance to fail at that also. For Philip thinks a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when in truth it is a Oval, for Philip has a unbalanced mind in geometry not able to reason-- a cone has 1 axis of symmetry just like a oval, but a ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry. This failure of Hanlon caused him to never be able to recognize that Calculus was geometry and hence Fundamental Theorem of Calculus needed a geometry proof also, instead of a feeble and foolish "limit analysis". For to this day, the Hanlon fool thinks that by analyzing something is akin to proving something. Perhaps all stemming from the fact that Hanlon has no logical marbles for a brain-- since Philip has Dartmouth College teach Boole logic with AND truth table of TFFF, having failed logic, unable to recognize that AND has to be TTTF, not TFFF, for that leads to the mindless 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, but Philip does not care about truth or reality, just how much money is in the treasury of Dartmouth.

Hanlon, too dumb to ask even the simple question of physics-- which is the Atom's true electron, the 0.5MeV particle or the muon, which AP says the muon is stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law producing more Dirac magnetic monopoles of 0.5MeV.

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 2:53:29 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Putin's Stooge"
> fails at math and science:

Why Kibo Parry M? Because Hanlon at Dartmouth and Joel still has ETH teach 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, how lame is that?

The ignorant Kibo Parry M who thinks 938 is 12% short of 945 says Joel Mesot is a failure of math and science, so failed that he has his school ETH Zurich Switzerland still teaching a ellipse is a conic when that is the Oval. Still teaching Calculus is not geometry because no-one at ETH can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and still teaching at ETH, the mindboggling idiocy of Boole logic truth table for AND to be TFFF when in reality it is TTTF. No wonder they cannot ask the question which is the Atom's true electron.

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the logic and math failure Jan Burse who has as first hit in a Google Search the Counterpoint of being BANNED from several Usenet sites, because all I want to say to other posters is "fart fart fart"
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

ETH's_Joel Mesot, Renatto Renner,
Andre Rubbia, Werner Schmutz, Thomas Schulthess, Manfred Sigrist, is Jan Burse violent-stalker the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 2:46:23 PM UTC-5, j4n bur53 wrote:
> Was that you,

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.
>

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am Kibo Parry M.. and has 2 Counterpoints on 1st page of my Google Search list, showing that I am a failure in all sciences, especially doing percentages but Rensselaer passed me anyway. Who cares if my buildings fall down the next day.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

Re: Swiss Jan Burse ANAL BUTTFUCKMANURE Stalker daily post corner
by Jan Jan 9, 2018, 12:02:41 AM

Jan Burse, why cannot ETH do a geometry proof of calculus fundamental theorem? Is it because they have no logical brains with their 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction?

Re: Drs.Martin Schweizer,Mete Soner,Michael Struwe-- Zurich ETH, are you as dumb in Calculus, no Picture of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, as is math failure Jan Burse??
by zelos...@gmail.com Dec 30, 2017, 10:50:52 PM

Re: Dr.Giovanni Felder, Zurich ETH, Jan Burse says that farting is taught before geometry, after counting in Switzerland/is that true??
by Jan Dec 3, 2017, 12:04:10 AM

Re: 3-Is Jan Burse head of Homosexual stalker ring in sci.math causing decay of sci.math??//and suppressing real science of confirming real proton is 840 MeV, real electron is the muon= 105MeV, and the .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole
by red...@siu.edu Oct 8, 2019, 12:18:10 PM

Re: Jan Burse says ETH is a wheelchair Walter Thurnherr, Werner Wegscheider, Audrey Zheludev, Oded Zilberberg //no picture diagram of Calculus proof// still believing proton is 938MeV electron .5MeV when they are 840MeV, 105MeV
by Jan Jul 27, 2018, 5:15:55 PM

Jan Burse, why cannot ETH do a geometry proof of calculus fundamental theorem? Is it because they have no logical brains with their 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction?

Kibo Parry M hates science more than Philip Hanlon or John Baez, for Kibo has 2 Counterpoints on his 1st page of Google Search. But he is trying to be like Jan Burse where the first hit on his 1st page is a Counterpoint, telling us that Jan Burse has 0 marbles of a logical brain. Kibo is close to 0 marbles in all departments and faculties.
On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:00:47 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"science hater"

Is Kibo Parry M mellowing out after 30 years stalking-- here is the mongrel in his early days of stalking, wild and naked--

Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Betsy DeVos, NSF Dr. Panchanathan Caltech Thomas F Rosenbaum, Harvard's Lawrence Bacow with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV ....
328 views
by ayaz.s....@gmail.com
Aug 16, 2020, 9:05:41 PM

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV when in truth..
1481 views
by Professor Wordsmith Aug 14, 2020, 11:07:05 AM

2 The cesspool spam by Clutterfreak into sci.physics-- is he federal drag net spam or Texas state drag net spam that pollutes sci.physics daily.
>
> At least John Baez stayed on topic, even if wrong, at least he tried to do physics. But when you have Clutterfreak spam-- is the reason sci.physics is mostly dead-- see AP's book, what killed Usenet-- for it is mostly the drag net spam like the creep Clutterfreak. He needs a new name-- Cluttercreep.
>
> And I rather have a John Baez post in sci.physics anyday, before a Clutterfreak creep
>
>
>
>
> 3
> Is Clutterfreak CIA-- with his offtopic spam and distraction for Texas A&M from resolving real electron is muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday Law? The 0.5MeV particle is Dirac monopole.
> 11:31 AM
> 
> Clutterfreak's profile photo
> Clutterfreak
> , …
>
> 32
> Hubba Hubba :-)
> Texas A&M spammer Clutterfreak says McGinn spam is funded by CERN, Harry Cliff with his fake
> 11:25 AM
> 
> Clutterfreak's profile photo
> Clutterfreak
> , …
> Michael Moroney
> 151
> unread,
> Cryptocurrencies :-)
> On 4/11/2022 10:58 AM, Clutterfreak wrote: > On 4/10/2022 10:52 PM, Clutterfreak wrote: >> A
> 11:20 AM
> 
> This conversation has been hidden because you reported it for abuse.

Kibo Parry M reviewing the Google Search lists of Dr. Hanlon and Dr. Panchanathan all in the same day. Kibo, is Dr. Hanlon 10 years behind in science also?

Dr.Panchanathan needs a 1st page Counterpoint in his Google Search list so says Kibo Parry who says 10 years behind. But more like 100 years behind the curve is the National Science Foundation NSF.
4m views

Dr.Panchanathan needs a 1st page Counterpoint in his Google Search list so says Kibo Parry who says 10 years behind. But more like 100 years behind the curve is the National Science Foundation NSF.

On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Congratulations! You "invented" the "Password Vault"/"Autofill"/Master
> Password" concept that are built in to browsers such as Firefox,
> Chrome/etc and have existed for years. Apple has a "Key Ring" concept
> in the OS itself. And these browsers have ways to transfer the
> "Password Vault" to a file to transfer to another browser or device.
>
> You're just 10 years behind.

---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

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

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

Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
>> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> >

AP no longer tolerates permanent hate spew stalkers like Kibo Parry M. of 30 years stalking. AP no longer tolerates insane stalkers like Kibo no matter where they are located. Unacceptable that a govt agent stalks a USA citizen for almost 30 years of hate attack spew like kibo Parry Moroney and AP redacts the spew and throws it back into their lap.

Kibo Parry M. wrote which AP redacted, for AP no longer can stomach the insane Kibo
On Wednesday, July 21, 2021 at 1:49:36 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>William J. Burns "AnalButtfuckManure"
> fails at math and science:
>

Frenchman Lacassagne 1885: "Every society has the criminals it deserves"

AP 2021: "Every University is _responsible_ for the filthy stalker or spammer who attended that school and is now a insane nonstop stalker or spammer on Usenet". Most college professors are new to the age of internet and the responsibilities have not seeped into them as yet, that if they have a mindless spammer in their community, it is their responsibility to guide and direct that misplaced soul to a rightful venue to unleash his/her mind.

AP 1990s: The Internet is new form of schooling with its openness, its publicity, and its international reach that College degrees in science can be passed out but also be made null & void if the beholder becomes an outrageous stalker & spammer of science on the Internet.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
11:45 AM (24 minutes ago)



to
Why Kibo Parry Moron is NSF Dr. Panchanathan 10 years behind? Is it because he is a failure in math not seeing that slant cut of single cone must be a Oval, never the ellipse for a cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. This means NSF and Dr. Panchanathan are not just 10 years behind in math but 2,000 years stifling idiots of math.

3rd published book

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

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
•
•

Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 26Jan2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.

Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.

In November of 2019, I was challenged to make the definition of Oval a well defined definition. I took up that task, and fortunately I waited a long time since, 2016, my discovery that the oval was the slant cut into a cone, not the ellipse. I say fortunately because you need physics in order to make a well defined definition of oval. You need the knowledge of physics, that electricity is perpendicular to magnetism and this perpendicularity is crucial in a well defined definition of oval. When I discovered the ellipse was never a conic in 2016, I probably could not have well defined the oval at that time, because I needed the 3 years intervening to catch up on a lot of physics, but by November 2019, I was ready willing and able. Then in August of 2020, I discovered a third new proof of Ellipse is a cylinder section never a conic section, using solid 3rd dimension geometry of ovoid and ellipsoid.

Cover picture is a cone and a cylinder on a cutting board and that is an appropriate base to place those two figures because sectioning means cutting, and the cuts we want to make into a single cone and a cylinder is a slant cut not a cut parallel to the base of the figures, nor a cut that leaves the figure open ended but a slant cut that leaves the figure a closed loop.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 21, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 2021 KB
• Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 50 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?

Why does Kibo Parry M hate Dr. Hanlon so much as to stalk him every day? Is it because he lets Dartmouth College teach the ellipse is a conic section when in truth it is a Oval at slant cut.
On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 2:02:38 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Hagfish of Math and Slime Eel of Physics
>"struggling for
> relevance"
> fails at math and
> science:

2 Kibo Parry M reviewing the Google Search lists of Dr. Hanlon and Dr. Panchanathan all in the same day. Kibo, is Dr. Hanlon 10 years behind in science also?
>
> Dr.Panchanathan needs a 1st page Counterpoint in his Google Search list so says Kibo Parry who says 10 years behind. But more like 100 years behind the curve is the National Science Foundation NSF.
> 4m views
>
> Dr.Panchanathan needs a 1st page Counterpoint in his Google Search list so says Kibo Parry who says 10 years behind. But more like 100 years behind the curve is the National Science Foundation NSF.
>
> On Tuesday, April 12, 2022 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Congratulations! You "invented" the "Password Vault"/"Autofill"/Master
> > Password" concept that are built in to browsers such as Firefox,
> > Chrome/etc and have existed for years. Apple has a "Key Ring" concept
> > in the OS itself. And these browsers have ways to transfer the
> > "Password Vault" to a file to transfer to another browser or device.
> >
> > You're just 10 years behind.
>
> ---quoting Wikipedia ---
> Controversy
> Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
> --- end quote ---
>
> NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
>
> Dr. Panchanathan , present day
> France Anne Cordova
> Subra Suresh
> Arden Lee Bement Jr.
> Rita R. Colwell
> Neal Francis Lane
> John Howard Gibbons 1993
>
> Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
> Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua
>
> Kibo Parry Moroney in 1997 blows his CIA cover-- to the entire world, mind you---
> Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
> >> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
> > >
>
> AP no longer tolerates permanent hate spew stalkers like Kibo Parry M. of 30 years stalking. AP no longer tolerates insane stalkers like Kibo no matter where they are located. Unacceptable that a govt agent stalks a USA citizen for almost 30 years of hate attack spew like kibo Parry Moroney and AP redacts the spew and throws it back into their lap.
>
> Kibo Parry M. wrote which AP redacted, for AP no longer can stomach the insane Kibo
> On Wednesday, July 21, 2021 at 1:49:36 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >William J. Burns "AnalButtfuckManure"
> > fails at math and science:
> >
> Frenchman Lacassagne 1885: "Every society has the criminals it deserves"
>
> AP 2021: "Every University is _responsible_ for the filthy stalker or spammer who attended that school and is now a insane nonstop stalker or spammer on Usenet". Most college professors are new to the age of internet and the responsibilities have not seeped into them as yet, that if they have a mindless spammer in their community, it is their responsibility to guide and direct that misplaced soul to a rightful venue to unleash his/her mind.
>
> AP 1990s: The Internet is new form of schooling with its openness, its publicity, and its international reach that College degrees in science can be passed out but also be made null & void if the beholder becomes an outrageous stalker & spammer of science on the Internet.
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 11:45 AM (24 minutes ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
> Why Kibo Parry Moron is NSF Dr. Panchanathan 10 years behind? Is it because he is a failure in math not seeing that slant cut of single cone must be a Oval, never the ellipse for a cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. This means NSF and Dr. Panchanathan are not just 10 years behind in math but 2,000 years stifling idiots of math.
> 
> 3rd published book
>
> AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
>
> 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
> •
> •
>
> Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 26Jan2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.
>
> Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.
>
> In November of 2019, I was challenged to make the definition of Oval a well defined definition. I took up that task, and fortunately I waited a long time since, 2016, my discovery that the oval was the slant cut into a cone, not the ellipse. I say fortunately because you need physics in order to make a well defined definition of oval. You need the knowledge of physics, that electricity is perpendicular to magnetism and this perpendicularity is crucial in a well defined definition of oval. When I discovered the ellipse was never a conic in 2016, I probably could not have well defined the oval at that time, because I needed the 3 years intervening to catch up on a lot of physics, but by November 2019, I was ready willing and able. Then in August of 2020, I discovered a third new proof of Ellipse is a cylinder section never a conic section, using solid 3rd dimension geometry of ovoid and ellipsoid.
>
> Cover picture is a cone and a cylinder on a cutting board and that is an appropriate base to place those two figures because sectioning means cutting, and the cuts we want to make into a single cone and a cylinder is a slant cut not a cut parallel to the base of the figures, nor a cut that leaves the figure open ended but a slant cut that leaves the figure a closed loop.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B081TWQ1G6
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 21, 2019
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 2021 KB
> • Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 50 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)
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 11:53 AM (17 minutes ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
> So we see a Google Search list of Dr. Panchanathan as nothing but sugar coated gloss and nothing to indicate he is a failure of mathematics, logic and physics-- thinks ellipse is a conic section, is mindless in logic with his 2 OR 1= 3 with AND as subtraction, can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, and too stupid to even ask the simple question-- which is the Atom's true real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle.
>
> As Kibo Parry Moron suggested 10 years behind the times, no, more like 2,000 years behind the times.
>
> About 74,900 results (0.56 seconds)
> Search Results
> Featured snippet from the web
> Image of dr panchanathan
> Image of dr panchanathan
> Image of dr panchanathan
> Image of dr panchanathan
> More images
> Dr Panchanathan
> The Honorable Sethuraman Panchanathan is a computer scientist and engineer and the 15th director of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Panchanathan was nominated to this position by the President of the United States in 2019 and subsequently unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate on June 18, 2020.
> Email: span...@nsf.gov
> Room: W 19100
> Phone: (703) 292-8000
>
> Sethuraman Panchanathan | NSFhttps://nsf.gov › staff › staff_bio
> About featured snippets
> •
> Feedback
> Web results
>
> Sethuraman Panchanathan - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Sethuraman_Panchana...
> Sethuraman Panchanathan is an Indian-American computer scientist and academic administrator, and the 15th Director of National Science Foundation since June ...
> Doctoral advisor: Morris Goldberg
> Education: University of Madras (‎BS‎); ‎Indian In...‎
> Spouse(s): Soumya Panchanathan
> President: Donald Trump; ‎Joe Biden‎
> ‎Early life and education · ‎Academic career · ‎Research interests
> People also ask
> Who is the director of National Science Foundation?
> Who started the National Science Foundation?
> Who does the National Science Foundation report to?
> What does the National Science Foundation do?
> Feedback
> Videos
>
> PREVIEW
> 35:21
> Sethuraman Panchanathan: The Future of Competitiveness
> YouTube · AAAS Annual Meeting
> Apr 1, 2021
> 10 key moments in this video
>
>
> PREVIEW
> 6:38
> Remarks from Sethuraman Panchanathan
> YouTube · Computing Research Association
> Aug 14, 2020
> 4 key moments in this video
>
> PREVIEW
> 14:55
> National Science Foundation Director Sethuraman ...
> YouTube · The Hill Events
> Jul 16, 2021
> Feedback
> View all
>
> Dr. Sethuraman (Panch) Panchanathan (@DrPanch) / Twitterhttps://twitter.com › drpanch
> Director of the National Science Foundation @NSF | Former Executive VP and Knowledge Enterprise & Chief Research Officer @ASU | Media inquiries ...
>
> An optimist takes the helm at the National Science Foundationhttps://www.science.org › content › article › optimist-take...
> The new director of the National Science Foundation (NSF), Sethuraman "Panch" Panchanathan, is familiar with the dark clouds over the agency.
>
> Sethuraman Panchanathan - Tempe, Arizona, United Stateshttps://www.linkedin.com › drpanch
> View Sethuraman Panchanathan's professional profile on LinkedIn. LinkedIn is the world's largest business network, helping professionals like Sethuraman ...
>
> Sethuraman Panchanathan - ASU iSearchhttps://isearch.asu.edu › profile
> Biography: In June, 2020, Dr. Sethuraman “Panch” Panchanathan was appointed by U.S. President Donald Trump as Director of the National Science Foundation ...
>
> An Interview With Director Of National Science Foundation Dr ...https://www.forbes.com › taarinikaurdang › 2021/10/29
> Dr. Panchanathan is the 15th Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF). He was nominated to the position by the former U.S. President ...
>
> NSF Director Shares Vision for Solutions-Focused Sciencehttps://www.diverseeducation.com › home › article › na...
> Oct 11, 2021 — Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan was appointed in 2019 by former President Donald J. Trump to lead the $8.5 billion independent federal agency.
>
> Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan Director National Science ...https://www.appropriations.senate.gov › downloadPDF
> Apr 13, 2021 — Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan. Director. National Science Foundation. Before the. Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related ...
> Related searches
> Image of National Science Foundation
> National Science Foundation

Philip Hanlon and Saul Perlmutter needs a 1st page Counterpoint in his Google Search list instead of 100% sugar coated gloss of a failed physicist who cannot ask a simple question. Since Kibo Parry M has 2 counterpoints on his 1st page, no reason that Dr. Hanlon and Dr. Perlmutter have at least 1.

On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 9:58:06 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Snail of Math and Green Banded Broodsac Nemotode of Physics
> "I ate your brain"
> tarded
>"one marble illogical brain"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

Do physicists Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish David J. Thouless ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the DiracMonopole

Physics failures Sheldon Glashow,Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,Peter Higgs, ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.

Can failed physicists with their mindless 0.5MeV particle traveling at 99% speed of light outside a 938MeV proton ever stay together, where AP says the true electron is the muon stuck INSIDE a proton torus of 840MeV doing the Faraday law-- do physicists Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane have to be failures all their life and never ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.

Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,
Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane, John M. Kosterlitz, Takaaki Kajita
Arthur B. McDonald
Francois Englert
Saul Perlmutter
Brian P. Schmidt
Adam G. Riess
Makoto Kobayashi
Toshihide Maskawa
Yoichiro Nambu
John C. Mather
George F. Smoot
Roy J. Glauber
David J. Gross
Hugh David Politzer
Frank Wilczek
Raymond Davis Jr.
Masatoshi Koshiba
Riccardo Giacconi
Gerardus 't Hooft
Martinus J.G. Veltman
Jerome I. Friedman
Henry W. Kendall
Richard E. Taylor
Carlo Rubbia
Simon van der Meer
William Alfred Fowler
Kenneth G. Wilson
James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch
Sheldon Lee Glashow
Steven Weinberg
..
..
little fishes
..
..
Layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = subtraction of either 3 or 2, while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV

Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
more and more layers of error thinking physics
..
..
John Baez
Brian Greene
Lisa Randall
Alan H. Guth
Michael E. Brown
Konstantin Batygin
Ben Bullock
Larry Harson
Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
None at all - he was a raving nutter.
Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
Edward Witten

Harvard Univ
President Larry Summers
President now Lawrence Bacow

Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin

MIT math dept.

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

Chancellor Cynthia Barnhart
President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

MIT physics dept
William Bertozzi, Robert Birgeneau, Hale Bradt, Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins , Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young

Why can no-one at Harvard or MIT ever ask the question which is the atom's true electron the muon or the 0.5MeV particle

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.

James Kibo Parry M says of Dartmouth's Philip Hanlon. Why Kibo? Because you have 2 counterpoints on your 1st page of Google hits showing you to be an insane stalker oaf.
On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 3:04:38 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Snail of Math and Green Banded Broodsac Nemotode of Physics
> "I ate your brain"
> "one marble illogical brain"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Betsy DeVos, NSF Dr. Panchanathan Caltech Thomas F Rosenbaum, Harvard's Lawrence Bacow with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV ....
328 views
by ayaz.s....@gmail.com
Aug 16, 2020, 9:05:41 PM

crancks & loonies
by James Kibo Parry Sep 28, 1994, 5:14:31 AM

By the way
by James Kibo Parry March 8, 1999

Re: bwr fml & Kibo Parry M on Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, failures of Natural Logarithm with their disconnect of Natural Log defined as integral area of Y=1/t in interval 1 to x
by
Michael Moroney Sep 21, 2021, 12:08:40 AM

> George F. Smoot needs a 1st page Counterpoint in his Google Search list instead of 100% sugar coated gloss of a failed physicist who cannot ask a simple question. Since Kibo Parry M has 2 counterpoints on his 1st page, no reason that Saul should have at least 1.
>
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2022 at 9:58:06 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Snail of Math and Green Banded Broodsac Nemotode of Physics
> > "I ate your brain"
> > tarded
> >"one marble illogical brain"
> >flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
>
> Do physicists Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish David J. Thouless ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the DiracMonopole
>
>
> Physics failures Sheldon Glashow,Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,Peter Higgs, ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.
>
> Can failed physicists with their mindless 0.5MeV particle traveling at 99% speed of light outside a 938MeV proton ever stay together, where AP says the true electron is the muon stuck INSIDE a proton torus of 840MeV doing the Faraday law-- do physicists Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
> David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane have to be failures all their life and never ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.
>
>
> Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,
> Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss, Kip S. Thorne, Barry C. Barish
> David J. Thouless, F. Duncan M. Haldane, John M. Kosterlitz, Takaaki Kajita
> Arthur B. McDonald
> Francois Englert
> Saul Perlmutter
> Brian P. Schmidt
> Adam G. Riess
> Makoto Kobayashi
> Toshihide Maskawa
> Yoichiro Nambu
> John C. Mather
> George F. Smoot
> Roy J. Glauber
> David J. Gross
> Hugh David Politzer
> Frank Wilczek
> Raymond Davis Jr.
> Masatoshi Koshiba
> Riccardo Giacconi
> Gerardus 't Hooft
> Martinus J.G. Veltman
> Jerome I. Friedman
> Henry W. Kendall
> Richard E. Taylor
> Carlo Rubbia
> Simon van der Meer
> William Alfred Fowler
> Kenneth G. Wilson
> James Watson Cronin
> Val Logsdon Fitch
> Sheldon Lee Glashow
> Steven Weinberg
> .
> .
> little fishes
> .
> .
> Layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = subtraction of either 3 or 2, while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV
>
> Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
> Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
> more and more layers of error thinking physics
> .
> .
> John Baez
> Brian Greene
> Lisa Randall
> Alan H. Guth
> Michael E. Brown
> Konstantin Batygin
> Ben Bullock
> Larry Harson
> Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
> Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
> None at all - he was a raving nutter.
> Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
> Edward Witten
>
> Harvard Univ
> President Larry Summers
> President now Lawrence Bacow
>
> Harvard Physics dept
> Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
> Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
> Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
> Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
> David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
> Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
> Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
>
>
> MIT math dept.
>
> 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
>
> Chancellor Cynthia Barnhart
> President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)
>
> MIT physics dept
> William Bertozzi, Robert Birgeneau, Hale Bradt, Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins , Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young
>
> Why can no-one at Harvard or MIT ever ask the question which is the atom's true electron the muon or the 0.5MeV particle
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> Foreward:
> I wrote the 8th edition of Atom Totality and near the end of writing it in 2017, I had my second greatest physics discovery. I learned the real electron of atoms was the muon at 105MeV and not the tiny 0.5MeV particle that J.J.Thomson found in 1897. So I desperately tried to include that discovery in my 8th edition and it is quite plain to see for I tried to write paragraphs after each chapter saying as much. I knew in 2017, that it was a great discovery, changing all the hard sciences, and reframing and restructuring all the hard sciences.
> Length: 632 pages
>
>
> Product details
> File Size: 1132 KB
> Print Length: 632 pages
> Publication Date: March 11, 2019
> Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
> Language: English
> ASIN: B07PLP9NDR
> Text-to-Speech: Enabled
> X-Ray: 
Not Enabled 

> Word Wise: Enabled
> Lending: Enabled
> Screen Reader: Supported
> Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
> Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #578,229 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
> #1610 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> #8526 in Physics (Books)
> #18851 in Biological Sciences (Books)
>
>
> #1-9, 163rd published book
> Stellar System Evolution for Advanced Intelligent Life //Atom Totality science Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition
>
>
> Preface: This book explores the question of why the Sun has a planet with abundant life that evolved over 3.7 billion years ago into the advanced intelligent life of humans, yet the Sun has gone Red Giant initiation phase that threatens to destroy all life on Earth in the next few thousand years. The question of why even bother having advanced intelligent life if the home star quickly destroys that life and the planet it resides upon? Why bother with advanced intelligent life if it is put under such enormous stress and strain and energy to move to a distant satellite of Europa and Ganymede. Surely the Cosmic design must tell us why this is our fate.
> Cover Picture: is my iphone photograph of Europa.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09NQ65H9F
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 15, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 999 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
>
>
> #1-10, 161st published book
>
> PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 133 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Preface:
> A Physicsopedia is a book of the overall assessment and evaluation of the state of the art of Physics. It is like a report card. It is a total view of the science and a judgement of the science, both of the past, present and the direction forward into the future. Its greatest use is to alert readers and people in science of what is wrong with their subject, and as a ancillary use, to alert students what to avoid in college as a waste of time.
> It is not in alphabetical order but mostly, rather, has a ordering of what is most important at the start and only at the very very end. For there is no index.
> Physics is the most important hard science for every other science is a specialized part of physics. And Old Physics has three key huge mistakes that this book addresses. The true theory of the Universe is the Atom Totality, not the Big Bang which is a ridiculous theory. The true electron of atoms is not the particle of 0.5MeV which turns out to be Dirac's magnetic monopole, while the true real electron of atoms is the muon of 105MeV which is stuck inside a proton torus of 8 rings of 840MeV. This causes another huge mistake, for a mistake in physics usually has a cascade effect of more and more mistakes. When we take the true electron of atoms is the muon, means the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but from that muon thrusting through the proton torus in a Faraday law of electricity and magnetism producing electrical energy. So our Sun shines from the Faraday law, not fusion. And this implies the Sun has gone into Red Giant phase with a solar radiation increase of 0.005% yearly increase. That implies all life on Earth is in danger of going extinct as the Sun becomes more and more Red Giant, and unless humanity moves out to Europa, humanity goes extinct.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09N18QPP1
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 3, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1139 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 82 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
>
> y z
> | /
> | /
> |/______ x
>
> More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci..physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
>
> In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
>
> I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
>
> There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
>
> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> Archimedes Plutonium
>
>
>
> #2-1, 137th published book
>
> Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
>
>
> #1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory
>
> This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.
>
> Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.
>
> Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
> And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
> Length: 64 pages
>
> Product details
> • File Size : 790 KB
> • Publication Date : October 5, 2020
> • Word Wise : Enabled
> • Print Length : 64 pages
> • Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Language: : English
> • ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
> • Lending : Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
> ◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
>
> #2-2, 145th published book
>
>
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
> Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN : B08PC99JJB
> • Publication date : November 29, 2020
> • Language: : English
> • File size : 682 KB
> • Text-to-Speech : Enabled
> • Screen Reader : Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
> • X-Ray : Not Enabled
> • Word Wise : Enabled
> • Print length : 78 pages
> • Lending : Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
> ◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)
>
> #2-3, 146th published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
> Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
> Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 123 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Best Sellers Rank: #4,167,235 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
> ◦ #15,099 in Physics (Kindle Store)
> ◦ #91,163 in Physics (Books)
>
>
> #2-4, 151st published book
>
> TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
> Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
>
> Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
>
> Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1033 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 386 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
>
>
> #2-9, 161st published book
>
> PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 133 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Preface:
> A Physicsopedia is a book of the overall assessment and evaluation of the state of the art of Physics. It is like a report card. It is a total view of the science and a judgement of the science, both of the past, present and the direction forward into the future. Its greatest use is to alert readers and people in science of what is wrong with their subject, and as a ancillary use, to alert students what to avoid in college as a waste of time.
> It is not in alphabetical order but mostly, rather, has a ordering of what is most important at the start and only at the very very end. For there is no index.
> Physics is the most important hard science for every other science is a specialized part of physics. And Old Physics has three key huge mistakes that this book addresses. The true theory of the Universe is the Atom Totality, not the Big Bang which is a ridiculous theory. The true electron of atoms is not the particle of 0.5MeV which turns out to be Dirac's magnetic monopole, while the true real electron of atoms is the muon of 105MeV which is stuck inside a proton torus of 8 rings of 840MeV. This causes another huge mistake, for a mistake in physics usually has a cascade effect of more and more mistakes. When we take the true electron of atoms is the muon, means the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but from that muon thrusting through the proton torus in a Faraday law of electricity and magnetism producing electrical energy. So our Sun shines from the Faraday law, not fusion. And this implies the Sun has gone into Red Giant phase with a solar radiation increase of 0.005% yearly increase. That implies all life on Earth is in danger of going extinct as the Sun becomes more and more Red Giant, and unless humanity moves out to Europa, humanity goes extinct.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09N18QPP1
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 3, 2021
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1139 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 82 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
>
>
>
> y z
> | /
> | /
> |/______ x
>
> More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci..physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
>
> In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
>
> I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
>
> There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
>
> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> Archimedes Plutonium
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> #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)

James S. Olvestad NSF, General Nakasone, Kibo Parry M on math failure Philip Hanlon. Why Kibo, because he is still deluded with a slant cut in single cone as ellipse when it is in truth a Oval, see AP proof below.

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:18:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"wasting everyone's time with his mindless, endless spam"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
1) NSA General Paul Nakasone
2) Dr. Panchanathan NSF
3) F. Fleming Crim NSF
4) Brian Stone NSF
5) James S. Olvestad NSF
6) Dorothy E. Aronson NSF

Kibo Parry Moron blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997, where was General Nakasone?
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

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

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

Dr Panchanathan how much do you pay Kibo to stalk nonstop for 30 years?

Kibo says failure Roger Penrose, Reinhard Genzel, Andrea Ghez,Peter Higgs, Rainer Weiss. Why Kibo? Because they think the electron of atoms is the 0.5MeV particle when in truth it is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law.

Kibo says physics failures Dr.Panchanathan, Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall, Harry Cliff says Kibo Parry M, the 30 year stalker, who says 938 is 12% short of 945.

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
 > Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
 > Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>  Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572.  A proton is about the mass
 > of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Kibo says math failures Ken Ribet, John Stillwell,Terence Tao, Andrew Wiles, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, SAYS stalker Kibo Parry M. of 30 years nonstop.
>
> Why Kibo, because Tao, Wiles, Hales, Stillwell, Ribet, believes a single cone with 1 axis of symmetry the same as a oval, yet a ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry and the above failures of math still brainwashing the world with their ellipse a conic section. Or is it that they preach Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3, with AND as subtraction, being brain dead in logic reasoning to understand the truth table of AND has to be TTTF and not the absurd (throw the baby out in the bathe water) of TFFF. Or is it that they fail to ever do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
>
> Why do you call them failures of math and logic Kibo Parry M, with your failure at Rensselaer Polytech with your 938 is 12% short of 945.

Kibo why do you have this open hate channel--
On Saturday, April 23, 2022 at 11:59:50 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On Friday, April 22, 2022 at 4:53:13 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"Putin's minion"
> On Tuesday, September 21, 2021 at 10:37:31 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >"AnalButtfuckManure"
> > fails at math and science:
> Kibo, I see you still use your famous invented word of 2017 "analbuttfuckmanure" as your frustrations in failing science, and now living on stalking those that succeed in science.
>
>
>
186th published book

Proof the Muon is true real electron of Atoms, and 0.5MeV particle is the magnetic monopole// physics research

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition

Preface: In April of 2022, AP notices a anomaly of battery life of operation and of power output of radioactive element plutonium compared to commonplace batteries such as lithium. And almost instantly, I realized this could be a proof that the muon stuck inside of every proton doing the Faraday law with the proton is the cause of this "extra electricity" and "long life longevity". When each proton inside a atom is an electrical generator producing electricity, means the heaviest elements in Nature are going to be the best batteries. Lithium atom has 3 protons+ 3muons while plutonium atom has 94 protons + 94muons, so that when divided, 94/3 we can expect that the plutonium battery is 31 times more electricity than lithium battery.

Well, in doing this book, I could only find evidence that the plutonium battery is 10 times better than a lithium battery, not 31 times. So maybe that is an anomaly for future research to work out. But for now, I have proven the muon is the real true electron of Atoms and that the 0.5MeV particle, although the unit particle of electricity, the 0.5MeV particle is not the atom's electron but is the Dirac magnetic monopole, produced by the muon thrusting through the proton torus in Faraday law.

Old Physics was really dumb physics, with their elementary particles doing nothing, but relaxing on a beach. Whereas in New Physics, every particle in Nature has a task and function to perform, such as the Faraday law. And that makes commonsense, while Old Physics is kook physics, no logical thinking.

Cover Picture: My iphone photograph picture of a Google search for when Caltech scientists Neddermeyer and Anderson discovered the muon particle of physics in 1936.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09YLLKWBX
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ April 20, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 366 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 36 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

3rd published book

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

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
•
•

Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 26Jan2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.

Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.

In November of 2019, I was challenged to make the definition of Oval a well defined definition. I took up that task, and fortunately I waited a long time since, 2016, my discovery that the oval was the slant cut into a cone, not the ellipse. I say fortunately because you need physics in order to make a well defined definition of oval. You need the knowledge of physics, that electricity is perpendicular to magnetism and this perpendicularity is crucial in a well defined definition of oval. When I discovered the ellipse was never a conic in 2016, I probably could not have well defined the oval at that time, because I needed the 3 years intervening to catch up on a lot of physics, but by November 2019, I was ready willing and able. Then in August of 2020, I discovered a third new proof of Ellipse is a cylinder section never a conic section, using solid 3rd dimension geometry of ovoid and ellipsoid.

Cover picture is a cone and a cylinder on a cutting board and that is an appropriate base to place those two figures because sectioning means cutting, and the cuts we want to make into a single cone and a cylinder is a slant cut not a cut parallel to the base of the figures, nor a cut that leaves the figure open ended but a slant cut that leaves the figure a closed loop.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 21, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 2021 KB
• Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 50 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

NSA Nakasone, NSF Panchanathan,Dorothy Aronson,Brian Stone hate stalk: "still can't find the marbles" of Jan Burse's ETH Joel Mesot, Renatto Renner, Andre Rubbia, Werner Schmutz, Thomas Schulthess, Manfred Sigrist, nor Kibo Parry Rensselaer Polytech Vincent Meunier, Ethan Brown, Glenn Ciolek, Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt

Kibo Parry--NSA,NSF hate stalkers looking for Vincent Meunier, Ethan Brown, Glenn Ciolek, Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt, lost marbles On Thursday, April 28, 2022 Kibo Parry M,General Nakasone,NSF France Anne Cordova,Subra Suresh,Arden Lee Bement Jr.,Rita R. Colwell,Neal Francis Lane,John Howard Gibbons wrote: "I*still* can't find my marbles".

Kibo, 30 year nonstop stalker, even if you do find Rensselaer Polytech marbles, do you honestly think they will admit the truth-- Oval is slant cut in single cone, not the ellipse, or give a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or ask the simple question which is the Atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle.
Dr. Panchanathan NSF, General Nakasone, Kibo Parry M on math failures Philip J. Hanlon, Thomas Hales. Why Kibo, because he is too dumb in math to do a geometry proof of Fundamental theorem of Calculus. Or is it because he is still deluded with a slant cut in single cone as ellipse when it is in truth a Oval, see AP proof below.

Kibo, why is Dr. Hanlon so dumb in math that he cannot even add 1 and 1, for a single cone has 1 axis of symmetry, oval 1 axis of symmetry yet ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry, yet the fools Hanlon, Hales, Wiles, Tao still teach ellipse is a conic section when it the Oval at slant cut.

The 30 year payed for attack stalker Kibo Parry M.
On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 1:59:04 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"I *still* can't find my marbles" "math hater"
> 77)

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:18:13 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"wasting everyone's time with his mindless, endless spam"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
1) NSA General Paul Nakasone
2) Dr. Panchanathan NSF
3) F. Fleming Crim NSF
4) Brian Stone NSF
5) James S. Olvestad NSF
6) Dorothy E. Aronson NSF

Kibo Parry Moron blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997, where was General Nakasone?
Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster
On Sunday, June 8, 1997 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <5nefan$i06$9...@news.thecia.net> kibo greps <ki...@shell.thecia.net> writes:
---quoting Wikipedia ---
Controversy
Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
--- end quote ---

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

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

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

Kibo Parry M on Donald Schwendeman and Harry Cliff-- why kibo? Because he cannot ask the simple question which is the atoms real electron -- muon or 0..5MeV particle?
>
> More to the point Rensselaer losing its accreditation for graduating a moron like Kibo Parry M. who still thinks 938 is 12% short of 945. Talk about failure, here Rensselaer graduates a so called engineer who cannot even do proper percentage problems.
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 2:15:25 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > "math hater"
> > fails at math and science:
> >Village Idiot"
> > fails at math and science:
>
> On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> > Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
> Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> > of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
>

Re: 1-Did Kibo-Parry-Maroney fail Rensselaer or was kicked out due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938, the .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole
by Roy Masters Sep 13, 2019, 3:24:07 PM

Re: 1.2-Did Kibo-Parry-Maroney fail Rensselaer or was kicked out due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938, the .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole
by Patricio J. Whackmember Sep 13, 2019, 5:43:28 PM

Re: 1.9-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton=840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Korniss,Toh-Ming Lu,Martin
By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:57:15 AM

Re: 2.0-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Michael,Newberg,N'Gom
By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:56:57 AM

Re: 2.1-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to such math failings as percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton is 840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Persans,Schroeder,Shur
By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:56:39 AM

Re: 2.2-Did Kibo-Parry-Moroney fail Rensselaer due to math percentage-- kibo's 938 is 12% short of 945// and why Rensselaer cannot confirm real proton=840MeV not 938; .5MeV particle is Dirac's monopole, why Drs.Shawn-Yu Lin,Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang
By Dingus Dirtbag McGee Sep 15, 2019, 9:56:28 AM

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Physics dept
Vincent Meunier, Ethan Brown, Glenn Ciolek, Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt, Yong Sung Kim, Gyorgy Korniss, Toh-Ming Lu, Charles Martin, Joseph Darryl Michael, Heidi Jo Newberg, Moussa N'Gom, Peter Persans, John Schroeder, Michael Shur, Shawn-Yu Lin, Humberto Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang, Morris A Washington, Esther A. Wertz, Christian M. Wetzel, Ingrid Wilke, Shengbai Zhang

Rensselaer math department
Donald Schwendeman, Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, William Henshaw, Isom Herron, Mark H Holmes, David Isaacson, Elizabeth Kam, Ashwani Kapila, Maya Kiehl, Gregor Kovacic, Peter Kramer, Gina Kucinski, Rongjie Lai, Fengyan Li, Chjan Lim, Yuri V Lvov, Harry McLaughlin, John E. Mitchell, Bruce Piper, David A Schmidt, Daniel Stevenson, Yangyang Xu, Bulent Yener, Donald Drew, William Siegmann

Re: 1.1Dr. John Baez is a failed mathematician-physicist with his proton of 938MeV when it is 840MeV, electron= muon //his ellipse is a conic when it never was// as phony in math and physics as kibo Parry Moroney's ellipse and Christensen 10 OR 4 by Dan Christensen Sep 22, 2019, 9:54:06 AM

Re: _Donald Schwendeman, Rensselaer,Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, is the reason you failed to confirm .5MeV was not the atom's electron but Dirac's monopole because you failed science like kibo
by Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Apr 25, 2019, 12:08:26 PM

Re: a second forgery post by Jan Burse-- time to pull the plug on him
by Mostowski Collapse (Jan Burse) Feb 24, 2017, 6:00:53 AM

Re: 4-Andrew Wiles and his fake FLT proof, so dumb on FLT he could not even spot Euler's flaw of exp 3 FLT, and so dumb as a mathematician, he never could do a geometry proof of calculus, FTC.
by Blake Studdard Jul 12, 2021, 10:51 AM

Re: A newsgroup like sci.math is a pile of shit when you have paid stalkers like Kibo Parry M. or Dan Christensen lording over sci.math as if he owns the place-- stalking and attacking posters 7-24-365. This is why I now post a roadmap to AP's newsgr
by Alan Mackenzie Jun 29, 2021, 2:36:04 PM

Re: 1.2Analbuttfuckmanure Justin Trudeau,Sophie Gregoire, says Dan Christensen or Kibo//Stephen Lecce, Jan Mináč, Victoria Olds, Martin Pinsonnault, Lex Renner, David Riley, Rasul Shafikov, Gordon Sinnamon
by Hoofington P. McSnort Aug 26, 2020, 7:01:28 PM

Re: 30) AP's 174th book// Mathopedia-- Listing of 70 fakes and mistakes of Old Math. 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
by Michael Moroney Jul 3, 2021, 12:55:10 PM

Re: More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics.
by Dan Christensen Jun 28, 2021, 2:33 PM

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 6:09 PM On 6/25/2021

Jan Burse is Joel Mesot a failure of math because he cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus or because he cannot even comprehend the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse? Stands to reason if Joel is too dumb in conic sections he would fail doing a proof of calculus.
>
> Jan Burse laughs at Joel Mesot, too dumb to ask even the simple question of physics-- which is the Atom's true electron, the 0.5MeV particle or the muon, which AP says the muon is stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law producing more Dirac magnetic monopoles of 0.5MeV.
> >
> Jan Burse Swiss failure with his ellipse a conic section when it is a Oval at the slant cut, but Jan farted his way through ETH.
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 8:52:23 AM UTC-5, Mostowski Collapse wrote:
> > Ha Ha, dream on with your Nazi mathematics and cleansing.
> >brain farto, Putler of sci.math and sci.physics.
> > Not a single line of math in 30 years.
>
> 3rd published book
>
> AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
>
> 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
> •
> •
>
> Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 26Jan2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.
>
> Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.
>
> In November of 2019, I was challenged to make the definition of Oval a well defined definition. I took up that task, and fortunately I waited a long time since, 2016, my discovery that the oval was the slant cut into a cone, not the ellipse. I say fortunately because you need physics in order to make a well defined definition of oval. You need the knowledge of physics, that electricity is perpendicular to magnetism and this perpendicularity is crucial in a well defined definition of oval. When I discovered the ellipse was never a conic in 2016, I probably could not have well defined the oval at that time, because I needed the 3 years intervening to catch up on a lot of physics, but by November 2019, I was ready willing and able. Then in August of 2020, I discovered a third new proof of Ellipse is a cylinder section never a conic section, using solid 3rd dimension geometry of ovoid and ellipsoid.
>
> Cover picture is a cone and a cylinder on a cutting board and that is an appropriate base to place those two figures because sectioning means cutting, and the cuts we want to make into a single cone and a cylinder is a slant cut not a cut parallel to the base of the figures, nor a cut that leaves the figure open ended but a slant cut that leaves the figure a closed loop.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B081TWQ1G6
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ November 21, 2019
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 2021 KB
> • Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 50 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)