Thomas Hales, the John Gabriel of mathematics, who needs badly a 1st page Counterpoint in a Google Search list

Thomas Hales never proved the Kepler Packing Problem, for the only persons that can prove Kepler Packing Problem are ones who have a clear definition and understanding of what Infinity as having a border means. You cannot discuss or imagine infinity without a border between that which is finite and that which is infinite. For Huygens many centuries back showed us that the Tractrix is a geometry figure that is endless, yet bounded. And with the Huygens enlightment of how to define infinity, that no-one working on Kepler Packing Problem was just wasting their time and the time of others.

Thomas Hales is not a geometer but a fool who wastes the time of others working in mathematics.

Kepler Packing was proved by AP starting way back in 1991 with kissing points, then added on the inclusion of a infinity borderline (Huygens tractrix) of a borderline at 1*10^604.

24th published book

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

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

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

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

Hales like Wiles offered only a fake proof. Hales is so very dumb in geometry, why the bard could not even understand the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse, and yet this bard thinks he proved Kepler Packing. There is a old saying we had as youngsters in Grade School, "can't tell shit from shinola". And that fits Thomas Hales exactly.

John Gabriel has a lot in common with Thomas Hales. Both think they know geometry, but both fail in geometry. There is a difference though. For Google Search engines play fair on John Gabriel, for his 3rd hit in "john gabriel math" his 3rd hit is "How to tell if someone is a crackpot... that John Gabriel is a complete crackpot..."

Unfortunately for Thomas Hales, there is no Counterpoint on his 1st page outlining that Thomas Hales is a math crackpot and failure of geometry. In this light, one can say Gabriel means more to math history than does Thomas Hales, for Gabriel is a known worthless to math, whereas the future has to clean out and clean up the mess that Hales has pooped onto mathematics.

Andrew Wiles offered a con-art messed up scree, for which he got fellow buddy members in math editors of math magazines to agree with. (The equivalent of bribery in math, one editor vouches for other magazine editors.) This is easily shown true because Wiles was so dumb on FLT, he never even spotted the gaping hole of Euler's exp3 FLT, where Euler forgot he had to prove in case of A,B,C in A^3 + B^3 = C^3 were not all three even numbers.

The world's first proof of FLT was given by AP way back in 1991, many years before Wiles ever hit the scene in late 1993. Yet the math community awards a con-artist-- Andrew Wiles and ignores the true prover of FLT.

AP would go on to prove Generalized FLT in 2014, and later would have two proofs of both FLT and Generalized FLT. All of this can be seen in AP's 6th published book

World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 // Math proof series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 29Apr2021. This is AP's 6th published book.

Preface:
Real proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof.

Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019, I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.

Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.

As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQKGW4M
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 12, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1503 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 156 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

But what AP is wanting to see improved in science is Google Search which is enormously biased in sugar coated gloss of some people whereas other people are given fair journalism of a Counterpoint on their first page, such as the kook Pete Olcott who spams sci.math daily with his "halting insanity".

Andrew Wiles has nothing but sugar coated propaganda and needs a 1st page Counterpoint. A counterpoint stating that Wiles is so dumb in mathematics that he cannot understand the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, not the ellipse. Wiles is so dumb in logic he buys Booles crazy AND truth table as TFFF when it correctly is TTTF to avoid the silly 2 OR 1 = 3. But where Wiles is intensely stupid in mathematics is that his small math brain never saw that the greatest math of our times was a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Wiles missed the boat in math, and is a clown of math that was awarded prized for fake math.

Olcott can John Coates,David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain ever do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or is that totally foreign to them? Mind you, not a limit analysis hornswaggle for that is not geometry, limit analysis is not even a math proof for anyone can analysis things, analysis this post and only math hypocrites would think it is a proof.

Re: Cambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning. And why do you encourage crank screwballs that repeat computer trash, Pete Olcott, spamming sci.math everyday?

On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 12:45:05 PM UTC-5, peteolcott wrote:
> When I correct the errors of the foundation of math in a math group
> this is bloody well not frigging spam.

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the crank crackpot David Sainsbury owner and shopkeeper and bar that is University of Cambridge who feels passionate that Crackpots like Olcott should spam-bomb over sci.math, heavier than Russia bombs Ukraine. I love my pets Olcott spam sci.math for I feed them both wet and dry food, like my cats, although my prized cat eats mostly fried chicken. Hello David-- this is 2022, not Britain with spitfires in WW2.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

Brian Stone NSF, General Nakasone, Kibo Parry M on math failure 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.

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

Kristjan Robam are you posting out of a Nordic country? Is there drought there also?

Thomas Hales, the John Gabriel of mathematics, who needs badly a 1st page Counterpoint in a Google Search list
>
> Thomas Hales never proved the Kepler Packing Problem, for the only persons that can prove Kepler Packing Problem are ones who have a clear definition and understanding of what Infinity as having a border means. You cannot discuss or imagine infinity without a border between that which is finite and that which is infinite. For Huygens many centuries back showed us that the Tractrix is a geometry figure that is endless, yet bounded. And with the Huygens enlightment of how to define infinity, that no-one working on Kepler Packing Problem was just wasting their time and the time of others.
>
> Thomas Hales is not a geometer but a fool who wastes the time of others working in mathematics.
>
> Kepler Packing was proved by AP starting way back in 1991 with kissing points, then added on the inclusion of a infinity borderline (Huygens tractrix) of a borderline at 1*10^604.
>
> 24th published book
>
> World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.
>
> Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07NMV8NQQ
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 20, 2019
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1241 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
> Hales like Wiles offered only a fake proof. Hales is so very dumb in geometry, why the bard could not even understand the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse, and yet this bard thinks he proved Kepler Packing. There is a old saying we had as youngsters in Grade School, "can't tell shit from shinola". And that fits Thomas Hales exactly.
>
> John Gabriel has a lot in common with Thomas Hales. Both think they know geometry, but both fail in geometry. There is a difference though. For Google Search engines play fair on John Gabriel, for his 3rd hit in "john gabriel math" his 3rd hit is "How to tell if someone is a crackpot... that John Gabriel is a complete crackpot..."
>
> Unfortunately for Thomas Hales, there is no Counterpoint on his 1st page outlining that Thomas Hales is a math crackpot and failure of geometry. In this light, one can say Gabriel means more to math history than does Thomas Hales, for Gabriel is a known worthless to math, whereas the future has to clean out and clean up the mess that Hales has pooped onto mathematics.
>
> Andrew Wiles offered a con-art messed up scree, for which he got fellow buddy members in math editors of math magazines to agree with. (The equivalent of bribery in math, one editor vouches for other magazine editors.) This is easily shown true because Wiles was so dumb on FLT, he never even spotted the gaping hole of Euler's exp3 FLT, where Euler forgot he had to prove in case of A,B,C in A^3 + B^3 = C^3 were not all three even numbers.
>
> The world's first proof of FLT was given by AP way back in 1991, many years before Wiles ever hit the scene in late 1993. Yet the math community awards a con-artist-- Andrew Wiles and ignores the true prover of FLT.
>
> AP would go on to prove Generalized FLT in 2014, and later would have two proofs of both FLT and Generalized FLT. All of this can be seen in AP's 6th published book
>
> World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 // Math proof series, book 5 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>
> Last revision was 29Apr2021. This is AP's 6th published book.
>
> Preface:
> Real proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof.
>
> Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019, I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.
>
> Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.
>
> As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).
>
> Product details
> • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQKGW4M
> • Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 12, 2019
> • Language ‏ : ‎ English
> • File size ‏ : ‎ 1503 KB
> • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
> • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
> • X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
> • Print length ‏ : ‎ 156 pages
> • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
>
> But what AP is wanting to see improved in science is Google Search which is enormously biased in sugar coated gloss of some people whereas other people are given fair journalism of a Counterpoint on their first page, such as the kook Pete Olcott who spams sci.math daily with his "halting insanity"..
>
> Andrew Wiles has nothing but sugar coated propaganda and needs a 1st page Counterpoint. A counterpoint stating that Wiles is so dumb in mathematics that he cannot understand the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, not the ellipse. Wiles is so dumb in logic he buys Booles crazy AND truth table as TFFF when it correctly is TTTF to avoid the silly 2 OR 1 = 3. But where Wiles is intensely stupid in mathematics is that his small math brain never saw that the greatest math of our times was a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Wiles missed the boat in math, and is a clown of math that was awarded prized for fake math.
>
> Olcott can John Coates,David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain ever do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or is that totally foreign to them? Mind you, not a limit analysis hornswaggle for that is not geometry, limit analysis is not even a math proof for anyone can analysis things, analysis this post and only math hypocrites would think it is a proof.
>
> Re: Cambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning. And why do you encourage crank screwballs that repeat computer trash, Pete Olcott, spamming sci.math everyday?
>
> On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 12:45:05 PM UTC-5, peteolcott wrote:
> > When I correct the errors of the foundation of math in a math group
> > this is bloody well not frigging spam.
>
>
>
>
> ..
> .- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
> , . `.' ' `.
> .' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
> . ; .' . `. ;
> ; . ' `. . '
> . ' ` `. |
> . '. '
> . 0 0 ' `.
> ' `
> ; `
> .' `
> ; U `
> ; '; `
> : | ;.. :` `
> : `;. ```. .-; | '
> '. ` ``.., .' :' '
> ; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the crank crackpot David Sainsbury owner and shopkeeper and bar that is University of Cambridge who feels passionate that Crackpots like Olcott should spam-bomb over sci.math, heavier than Russia bombs Ukraine. I love my pets Olcott spam sci.math for I feed them both wet and dry food, like my cats, although my prized cat eats mostly fried chicken. Hello David-- this is 2022, not Britain with spitfires in WW2.
> ` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
> ` ` ; ; ' '
> ` ` ; ; ' '
> ` `. ````'''''' ' '
> ` . ' '
> / ` `. ' ' .
> / ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
> / .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
> / .'' ; ` .' `
> ...'.' ; .' ` .' `
> "" .' .' | ` .; \ `
> ; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
> :' | ' ` , `. `
> | ' ` ' `. `
> ` ' ` ; `. |
> `.' ` ; `-'
> `...'
>
>
>
>
>
> ..
> .- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
> , . `.' ' `.
> .' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
> . ; .' . `. ;
> ; . ' `. . '
> . ' ` `. |
> . '. '
> . 0 0 ' `.
> ' `
> ; `
> .' `
> ; U `
> ; '; `
> : | ;.. :` `
> : `;. ```. .-; | '
> '. ` ``.., .' :' '
> ; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the spam bomber Pete Olcott of sci.math with my endless nonsense of halting. For I spam bomb sci.math because it irritates people, for I myself failed logic, math and science. And my only way of getting attention is to spam bomb sci.math.
> ` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
> ` ` ; ; ' '
> ` ` ; ; ' '
> ` `. ````'''''' ' '
> ` . ' '
> / ` `. ' ' .
> / ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
> / .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
> / .'' ; ` .' `
> ...'.' ; .' ` .' `
> "" .' .' | ` .; \ `
> ; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
> :' | ' ` , `. `
> | ' ` ' `. `
> ` ' ` ; `. |
> `.' ` ; `-'
> `...'
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Olcott can Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. Or does that thought fly way too above their heads?
> >
> > Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
> > Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
> > Genius hits a target no one else can see.
> >
> >
> >
> > Olcott, why cannot Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes, Irvine, Jardine ask the question which is the atom's real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle? Is it because they cannot even do logic correctly with their 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction?
> > >
> > > Olcott why does Cambridge Univ Stephen J. Toope, David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain keep teaching Boole error filled logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, and never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and these crazies still think the slant cut in cone is a ellipse when in fact it is a Oval. Why brainwash and pollute more students like Pete Olcott who is crazy enough as it is.
> > >
> > > Olcott why is noone in Cambridge physics able to ask the question which is the atom's true real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle? Sargent, Saunders, Saxena, Schneider, Scott, Scrivener, Sebastian, Simmons, Simons, Sirringhaus, Smith?? Do they not have a brain to ask a simple question????
>
> > >
> > >
> > > Cambridge professors insane about Logic turns students like Pete Olcott insane also.
> > >
> > > Cambridge Physics Dept
> > >
> > > Ahnert, Alai, Alexander, Allison, Ansorge, Atature, Barker, Barnes, Bartlett, Batley, Baumberg, Bohndiek, Bowman, Brown, Buscher, Butler, Campbell Carilli, Carter, Castelnovo, Challis, Chalut, Chaudhri, Chin, Ciccarelli, Cicuta, Cole, Cooper, Cowburn, Credgington, Cross, Croze, Deschler, Donald, Duffett-Smith, Dutton, Eiser, Ellis, Euser, Field, Flynn, Ford, Friend, Gibson, Green, Greenham, Gripaios, Grosche, Guck, Gull, Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes, Irvine, Jardine, Jenkins, Jones, Josephson, Keyser, Khmeinitskii, King, Kotlyar, Lamacraft, Lasenby, Lester, Longair, Lonzarich, Maiolino, Marshall, Martin, Mitov, Morris, Mortimer, Moller, Needs, Norman, Nunnenkamp, Padman,Parker, Patel, Payne, Pepper, Phillips, Pramauro, Queloz, Rao, Richer, Riley, Ritchie, Sargent, Saunders, Saxena, Schneider, Scott, Scrivener, Sebastian, Simmons, Simons, Sirringhaus, Smith, Sutherland, Taylor, Teichmann, Terentjev, Thomson, Verrechia, Walker, Ward, Warner, Weale, Webber, Whyles, Withington.
> > >
> > > Cambridge Math Dept
> > >
> > > Alan Baker
> > > Bela Bollobas
> > > Darwin Smith
> > > John Coates
> > > Timothy Gowers
> > > Peter Johnstone
> > > Imre Leader
> > > Gabriel Paternain
> > >
> > > Can any-one at Cambridge start correcting the error filled Boole, Jevons, Russell, Whitehead, Godel, Wittgenstein, all failures of logic and logical reasoning, include Cantor and his tripe of undefined infinity, an infinity without a borderline between finite and infinite.
> > >
> > > Cambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning.
> > Cambridge failures of physics who cannot even ask the question which is the atom's true real electron-- the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole. Harry Cliff, AP requires that Harry Cliff LHCb physicist to publish in the Cambridge Univ student newspaper of how sorry he is and apologizes for his physics stupidity of thinking that a hydrogen atom is composed of a electron of 0.5MeV flying around outside of a proton of 938MeV, flying around at 99% speed of light and still holding up and holding together as a hydrogen atom. Such stupid physics.
> > > >
> > > > Whereas the truth be known the real electron of a hydrogen atom is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus of 8 rings, where the muon and proton are doing the Faraday Law of producing more new electricity and storaging that electricity in what are known as neutrons. Because the muon is inside the proton it can fly around the torus inside at nearly the speed of light.
> > > >
> > > > Old Physics which Harry Cliff is a member, never took Logic, never learned how to think straight, think clear, and thus his physics knowledge is just hand down memorization. So stupid he never understood what the hell is angular momentum for no hydrogen atom can exist with a 0.5MeV particle flying around at 99% speed of light and stay put on a proton of 938MeV.
> > > >
> > > > AP says the 0.5MeV particle is Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. Now Dirac was a real physicist, but not Harry Cliff and everyone at CERN with their electron = 0.5MeV.
> > > >
> > > > So, Harry Cliff, AP requires you to publish in Cambridge student newspaper your apology for the boneheaded physics you pursue and teach and test on fake physics of the atom.
> > > >
> > > > AP, King of Science, especially Physics
> > > >

Kristjan, can you do a logo picture of nice good rain? You have one of airplanes, can you do rain?
Kristjan Robam are you posting out of a Nordic country? Is there drought there also?

kibo Parry M. on psychoceramic physicists with no Counterpoint such as Harvard's Sheldon Glashow and Thomas Hales in math with his silly dumb Kepler Packing from computer graphics as a proof, why Dr. Hales is such a failure of math geometry that the oaf still preaches the slant cut of cone is an ellipse when in truth a High School student can prove it is a Oval, never the ellipse.
..
>
> 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
>

kibo Parry M. on psychoceramic physicists with no Counterpoint such as Sheldon Glashow
On Saturday, September 17, 2022 at 2:03:23 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"Clown Prince of Physics"
> fails at math and science:

>didn't you learn about the mathematical order of
> operations in grade school? No? That explains why you are the clown
> prince of mathematics. Anyway, for operators of the same rank, they are
> evaluated left to right, and obviously division has the same rank as
> division.
>
> You are actually correct (for once!) that it is confusing, and
> parentheses should be used. For example, you screwed up and evaluated
> his rm/vm/X in the wrong order. But since it is confusing, parentheses
> should be used.
> >
> > Please go away from sci.physics for you are no help to people who want to learn the truth of science.
> Since it's obvious that you have zero interest in learning the truth of
> science, does that mean you're going to leave sci.physics?

Why, Kibo Parry M........ Sheldon is so dumb in physics, he still thinks slant cut of cone is a ellipse when actually it is a Oval. And so very dumb in physics that he could never manage to ask the simple question, which is the Atom's true electron-- is it the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or is it the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole.

███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
Radio-wave Rifle felling GLONASS satellites

Putin is insane and Xi is "dumb", both are dictators and living in a "bubble of nonreality". Ukraine shows us that the weapons of the West are far superior. But it will not last long, unless the West shows both Russia and China that they will lose if they push nuclear buttons. To show them, is to show them their satellites falling out of the sky. That shows them that the West will annihilate them if they push nuclear buttons.

And with their satellites of GLONASS, BeiDou falling out of the skies, and Iran satellites, and North Korea if they have any satellite. That the West is still far far superior. But if the West tap toe dances around, then soon, the West will be behind. The West must take advantage of this momentary superiority and fell GLONASS, BeiDou, making their satellites fall to Earth and thus, their ICBMs obsolete, for the West can manipulate Russian ICBMs and can manipulate the Chinese supersonic low flying nuke. They no longer have the navigation system to guide them.

The Ukraine invasion is a teaching lesson for the insane and dumb dictators-- a lesson that the West is still ahead and in charge. A lesson that can only be taught to the insane and dumb dictators via eye witness-- seeing their satellites falling out of the sky.

No Olaf Scholz visit can teach insane and dumb dictators.

No Lavrov meeting at UN can teach insane and dumb dictators.

No economic sanctions on Russia, and soon to be China can teach insane and dumb dictators.

What does teach insane and dumb dictators is when they see their satellites falling out of the skies. And thus much of Russia has no more telephone service over vast portions of Russia, nor China has telephone service over vast portions of China.

And then North Korea insane dictator wakes up to the fact-- no more missile launches because BeiDou fell to the ground and can no longer navigate the insane dictators missile.

And Iran gets rid of its insane dictator, because Iran no longer has telephones due to the fact their satellite is on the ground, not in the air.

The West needs to show its superiority of science and technology NOW NOW NOW, for the longer the West is in passive mode-- appeasing the insane and dumb dictators, the more difficult it is for the West to stay on top.

Recent visit by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to China was fine and alright, provided China delivers on making Putin retreat and exit Ukraine. If Putin keeps bombing Ukraine, then Scholz's visit is the beginning of the total exit of All West trading with China. And China applied total economic sanctions as applied to Russia.

China+Russia is a existential threat to the West. A China+Russia will not stop their aggressions until they defeat and dominate Earth as petty dictators.

The West is still far more powerful than China+Russia, but the West needs a pathway into subduing China+Russia. And that is clearly shown by the superiority of West science and manufacturing.

If China cannot make Putin's Russia stand down and exit Ukraine, then the West needs to start destroying and ruining and felling all GLONASS, BeiDou, even Iran satellites. By doing so, sends a clear message to the idiot dictators that the West is far more superior. And by destroying their satellites, their constant ICBM threat is made rather "mute", for it is their satellites that will navigate their ICBMs. If their satellites are knocked out-- their ICBMs are knocked out.

I would say that Putin is so far far insane that he will never stop bombing Ukraine, and in that regard, the West needs to start felling GLONASS immediately. Once Russia sees its satellites falling out of the sky, Russia will realize that the ICBM threat is no longer as "stingy" as before. That Russia needs to get rid of Putin as fast as possible.

I suspect Xi is sane but rather dumb, and will not convince Putin to stand down and exit Ukraine. In this regard, immediately start felling BeiDou satellites, for it is this action that convinces a "dumb Xi" that his China will along with Russia lose if any one of them pushes nuclear buttons.

Insane dictators and dumb dictators need to see their satellites falling out of the sky before they come to any commonsense logical view of the world as it is on 5Nov2022.

Start the felling of satellites.

And Germany-- the world is split in half between the "Good guys-- the West" and the evil dictators. If Xi does not deliver soon on Russia. Then the day is rapidly approaching where China is in total economic sanctions the same as Russia. You cannot go on making rich our enemies who mean to destroy and kill us.

>
>
> ▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
> I███████████████████].
> ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...
>
> LASER- or RADIO WAVE RIFLE to shoot down GLONASS, Iran, BeiDou satellites..
>
> And end the Ukraine war
>
Pentagon, how many satellites exactly does Russia, China, Iran have?? And does North Korea have a satellite or do they use BeiDou???

███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
Radio Wave & Laser Rifle to shoot down GLONASS and BeiDou satellites
>
> ▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
> I███████████████████].
> ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...
Satellite RIFLE to shoot down GLONASS, Iran,and BeiDou satellites.
Hooray

Hooray!! End the Ukraine war

Easiest way to end the Ukraine invasion by Russia, start felling GLONASS satellites, fell them directly with radar laser pulses or jam them to fall.

Now I thought GLONASS Russian satellites numbered in the thousands, for the Internet is lousy on this question of how many satellites, for recently BBC was vague with a estimate of 600 satellites, yet another web site said 42,000. But apparently only 24 are operational for GLONASS. And my take on this is that satellites are precarious vessels and easily for something to go wrong and be inoperative. All the better to look for flaws in engineering to down all 24 GLONASS Russian satellites.

So, easy easy Achilles tendon in all of the Russian ICBM military strategy, for knock out the 24 and you in a sense, knock out the entire Russian ICBM arsenal, for they no longer have any navigation.

And if the West is on its top shape and form in technology, we want the West Scientists to figure out how to intercept the Russian ICBM and cause it to fall upon Russia and explode upon Russia.

Get the best electronics and electrical engineers of the West to figure out how to cause all Russian launched and Chinese launched ICBMs to explode on home territory.

Caveat: if the West can do it, mind you, the Chinese and Russians will want to steal those secrets from the West and that should never be allowed--Ultimate Top Secret classification that not even a punk weirdo president like Trump cannot see, nor mention to him for he would likely sell it for a golf course in some foreign enemy country.

Google search reveals
24+
GLONASS (Globalnaya Navigazionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema, or Global Navigation Satellite System) is a global GNSS owned and operated by the Russian Federation. The fully operational system consists of 24+ satellites.Oct 19, 2021

Other Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) - GPS.govhttps://www.gps.gov › systems › gnss
About featured snippets
•
Feedback
People also ask
How many satellites are in the GLONASS?
As of 15 October 2022, 143 GLONASS navigation satellites have been launched, of which 131 reached the correct orbit and 24 are currently operational.

List of GLONASS satellites - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › List_of_GLONASS_sa...
Search for: How many satellites are in the GLONASS?
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
Nov 5, 2022, 11:02:21 PM (2 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
Radio Wave--Laser Rifle felling BeiDou satellites

From what I gather on internet, Russia has 24 satellites in operation while BeiDou China has 35.
> ▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
> I███████████████████].
> ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...
Radio Wave-- LASER RIFLE to shoot down the premier BeiDou satellite.
Ending the dumb and stupid petty dictators launching rockets from North Korea.

It is respectfully request help from engineers in Japan to help fell the BeiDou satellites that navigate the illegal North Korea launches.

--- quoting Wikipedia ---
The BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS; Chinese: 北斗卫星导航系统; pinyin: Běidǒu Wèixīng Dǎoháng Xìtǒng) is a Chinese satellite navigation system. It consists of two separate satellite constellations. The first BeiDou system, officially called the BeiDou Satellite Navigation Experimental System and also known as BeiDou-1, consisted of three satellites which, beginning in 2000, offered limited coverage and navigation services, mainly for users in China and neighboring regions. BeiDou-1 was decommissioned at the end of 2012. The second generation of the system, officially called the BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) and also known as COMPASS or BeiDou-2, became operational in China in December 2011 with a partial constellation of 10 satellites in orbit. Since December 2012, it has been offering services to customers in the Asia-Pacific region.

In 2015, China launched the third generation BeiDou system (BeiDou-3) for global coverage. The first BDS-3 satellite was launched on 30 March 2015. On 27 December 2018, BeiDou Navigation Satellite System started providing global services. The 35th and the final satellite of BDS-3 was launched into orbit on 23 June 2020. It was said in 2016 that BeiDou-3 will reach millimeter-level accuracy (with post-processing). On 23 June 2020, the final BeiDou satellite was successfully launched, the launch of the 55th satellite in the Beidou family. The third iteration of the Beidou Navigation Satellite System provides full global coverage for timing and navigation, offering an alternative to Russia's GLONASS, the European Galileo positioning system, and the US's GPS.

According to China Daily, in 2015, fifteen years after the satellite system was launched, it was generating a turnover of $31.5 billion per annum for major companies such as China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation, AutoNavi Holdings Ltd., and China North Industries Group Corp. The industry has grown an average of over 20% in value annually to reach $64 billion in 2020 according to Xinhua citing data.

Domestic industry reports forecast the satellite navigation service market output value, directly generated and driven by the Beidou system, will be worth 1 trillion yuan ($156.22 billion) by 2025, and $467 billion by 2035.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
Nov 5, 2022, 11:20:20 PM (1 hour ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
Radio Wave--Laser Rifle felling Iran satellites
>
> From what I gather on internet, Russia has 24 satellites in operation while BeiDou China has 35, that would indicate Iran has but a few satellites.
> > ▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
> > I███████████████████].
> > ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...
> Radio Wave-- LASER RIFLE to shoot down the premier BeiDou satellite.
> Ending the dumb and stupid petty dictator sending drones to Russia to down Ukraine power utility electric lines.

How many of the Iran satellites are used in drones destroying Ukraine electric grid. We should immediately fell those satellites.

--- quoting Wikipedia on Iran satellites ---
On 22 April 2020, Iran successfully launched "Noor" (Farsi for "Light"), a military satellite, into a 426 x 444 km / 59.8° orbit.

On 8 March 2022, Iran reportedly sent its second “Nour-2” military satellite into 500 km orbit.[55][56]
The Khayyam, a high resolution imaging satellite, was successfully launched into orbit by a Russian Soyuz rocket on 9 August 2022
Unlaunched satellites
Nahid (1), satellite with folding solar panels.
Toloo, is the first of a new generation of reconnaissance satellites being built by Iran Electronics Industries with SIGINT capabilities. It will be launched by a Simorgh.
Nasir 1, Iran's indigenously designed satellite navigation system (SAT NAV) has been manufactured to find the precise locations of satellites moving in orbit.

Zohreh, is a geosynchronous communication satellite which was originally proposed before the Revolution in the 1970s as part of a joint Indian-Iranian project of four Iranian satellites to be launched by the then upcoming NASA Space Shuttles. Iran had also negotiated with France to build and launch the satellites but the project never materialized. In 2005, Iran negotiated with Russia to build and launch the first Zohreh satellite under an agreement worth $132 million with the satellite launch date stipulated as 2007–2008. The new agreement had followed the earlier failed negotiations with Russia in 2003 when Russia cancelled the project under US pressures.
Ekvator, a geosynchronous communications satellite built by ISS Reshetnev for Iran in a continuation of previous Russia-Iran space cooperation efforts.. As of October 2022, Ekvator is expected to be launched on a Proton-M rocket in early 2024.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
Nov 5, 2022, 11:38:31 PM (1 hour ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
Radio Wave--Laser Rifle felling North Korean satellites
>
> From what I gather on internet, Russia has 24 satellites in operation while BeiDou China has 35, that would indicate Iran has but a few satellites. And North Korea fewer yet.

> > ▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
> > I███████████████████].
> > ◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...

Radio Wave-- LASER RIFLE to shoot down the 3 North Korean satellites.

Ending the dumb and stupid petty dictator with his endless illegal missile launches. Launches that do nothing of good for anyone. Not even the idiot petty dictator.

Earle Jones disparaging Dr.Hales a failure of geometry and mathematics with his mindless slant cut of cone a ellipse for the imbecile Hales cannot count from 1 to 2, for cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, ellipse has 2.

On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 6:00:00 PM UTC-6, Earle Jones wrote:

> *
> AP: After you get rid of "heat" you can begin to work on "light" and then "sound".
>
> If you get rid of charge, do you also get rid of current?
>
> As I recall, you have already eliminated prime numbers, rational and irrational numbers and continuous functions.
>
> By the way, if you get rid of imagiinary, rational, and irrational numbers, there are no numbers left!
>
> That reall does simplify mathematics!
>
> earle
> *