Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Garbage In -- Gospel Out.


tech / sci.math / Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

SubjectAuthor
* Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium
`* Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium
 `* Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium
  `* Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium
   `* Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium
    `* Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium
     `- Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation testArchimedes Plutonium

1
Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=93979&group=sci.math#93979

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:178a:b0:2e1:e7b8:e52e with SMTP id s10-20020a05622a178a00b002e1e7b8e52emr3927776qtk.464.1647434603609;
Wed, 16 Mar 2022 05:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:cf56:0:b0:633:8fbc:774c with SMTP id
f83-20020a25cf56000000b006338fbc774cmr2139889ybg.570.1647434603437; Wed, 16
Mar 2022 05:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 05:43:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:387:b:3:0:0:0:18;
posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:387:b:3:0:0:0:18
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com> <e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 12:43:23 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 7
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Wed, 16 Mar 2022 12:43 UTC

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

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

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

Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=94331&group=sci.math#94331

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:508:b0:2e1:deae:22bd with SMTP id l8-20020a05622a050800b002e1deae22bdmr13998038qtx.597.1647814706581;
Sun, 20 Mar 2022 15:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a5b:6cf:0:b0:61e:1371:3cda with SMTP id
r15-20020a5b06cf000000b0061e13713cdamr19860761ybq.235.1647814706178; Sun, 20
Mar 2022 15:18:26 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2022 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:387:b:9:0:0:0:5c;
posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:387:b:9:0:0:0:5c
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com>
<e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com> <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2022 22:18:26 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 714
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Sun, 20 Mar 2022 22:18 UTC

If one read only Google Search, one gets the impression Andrew Wiles is some hero of math, when the exact opposite is the truth. For Wiles is a con-artist of math that through his editing of a math journal was able to hoodwink the world into giving him recognition for what amounts to nothing but con-art math. So dumb was Andrew Wiles on Fermat's Last Theorem, FLT, that the nitwit could not even spot the fake proof given by Euler for exponent 3. See AP's true real proof of FLT, and so pathetically stupid is Andrew Wiles in math that to this very day he thinks a ellipse is the slant cut in single cone when in truth it is the Oval; he thinks 2 OR 1= 3 with AND as subtraction and his minuscule aptitude in math blinded him to the fact that calculus is geometry therefore requires a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

And Google Search is doing the academic world a huge disfavor by not having at least One Counterpoint on Wiles first page of a Google search. No, Google has millions of sugar coated glop on Andrew Wiles the con artist of mathematics and not one Counterpoint. Take a look at Kibo Parry and he has 2 counterpoints on his first page. Jan Burse Google Search has the very first entry as a counterpoint and well deserved by the Swiss stalker Jan Burse. AP has several counterpoints on his first page. But a Andrew Wiles, a con artist extraordinare has pulled the wool over the eyes of the entire world and Google Search is making matters worse by their refusal to see themselves not as a --advertisement shop to make money-- but see themselves as electronic journalism, in the mold of PBS Newshour, where you provide Counterpoint on first page.

Andrew Wiles,Terence Tao,Thomas Hales, Google Search just sugar coated glop for math failures, Google Search never a COUNTERPOINT on first page for these math failures. Kibo Parry has a Counterpoint on his first page of Google Search so does the stalker Jan Burse. AP has several counterpoints on his first page. So why should Math failures Tao, Wiles, Hales, Stillwell, Ribet, Pipher, Gerald Edgar, have nothing but sugar glop-- oh look at boy wonderful and never any Counterpoint such as the fact these are math idiots with their Boole logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, so mixed up in mind that they think slant cut in single cone is ellipse when in truth it is Oval, and worst of all, all these fools of math know calculus is geometry, yet they never can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, all they can do is the mind-rot limit analysis. Yet Google Search honors them with millions of hits of worthless sugary flowery glop.

Kibo and Swiss Jan Burse complaining for 20 years that Thomas Hales, Dr. Andrew Wiles and Dr. Tao cannot tell apart a Oval from ellipse as proven by AP that slant cut in single cone is a oval, never the ellipse. Or that Dr. Tao is so ignorant of math, he never knew Calculus was geometry and hence required a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or the fact that Tao failed math is because he failed logic using Boole's 2 OR 1= 3 with AND as subtraction. Perhaps the reason he failed all of mathematics is because his brain still is chugging on 2 OR 1 = 3. See AP's proofs of all his claims in his Amazon Kindle science books-- 177 books to date.

Why does Google Search have sugar coated boutique shops for failures of science, physics, math, when they have an obligation of Balanced Journalism with A COUNTERPOINT entry on first page of Terence Tao.

No wonder Tao, Wiles, Hales, Pipher, Ribet, Stillwell, think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse with monsterously ugly so called proofs as below. When AP simply proves it in his published book-- Ellipse has two axes of symmetry while cone & oval have one axis of symmetry along with AP's Euclidean geometry proof in his Amazon Kindle book.

On Sunday, March 20, 2022 at 2:18:02 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>"one marble illogical brain"
>flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test
>
> However, there are many proofs that the slant cut is an ellipse. Such as
> this one:
>
>
> I'll start with the cone z^2 = x^2 + y^2, and rotate it through an angle
> 'theta' around the 'y' axis, and consider the intersection of that rotated
> cone with the plane z = <constant>
>
> To simplify things, let c = cos(theta) and s = sin(theta). Then the
> rotation is defined by
>
> z --> cz + sx
> x --> -sz + cx
> y --> y
>
> So the equation of the rotated cone is
>
> (cz+sx)^2 = (-sz+cx)^2 + y^2
>
> and now let C = c^2-s^2 and S = 2sc (again, just to simplify the look
> of things)
>
> so we get
>
> Cz^2 = Cx^2 - 2Szx + y^2
>
> and letting 'z' equal the constant 'k' gives
>
> Ck^2 + k^2*S^2/C = C(x - k*S/C)^2 + y^2
>
> which is the equation of an ellipse if C > 0.

No wonder Tao, Wiles, Hales, Pipher, Ribet, Stillwell, think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse with monsterously ugly so called proofs as below. When AP simply proves it in his published book-- Ellipse has two axes of symmetry while cone & oval have one axis of symmetry along with AP's Euclidean geometry proof in his Amazon Kindle book.

On Monday, June 15, 2020 at 1:13:27 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Here you are!
> Below you will find a simple *proof* that shows that certain conic
> sections are ellipses.
>
> Some preliminaries:
>
> Top view of the conic section and depiction of the coordinate system used
> in the proof:
>
> ^ x
> |
> -+- < xh
> .' | `.
> . | .
> | | |
> ' | '
> `. | .'
> y <----------+ < x0
> Cone (side view):
> .
> /|\
> / | \
> /b | \
> /---+---' < x h
> / |' \
> / ' | \
> / ' | \
> x 0 > '-------+-------\
> / a | \
>
> Proof:
>
> r(x) a - ((a-b)/h)x and d(x) a - ((a+b)/h)x, hence
>
> y(x)^2 r(x)^2 - d(x)^2 ab - ab(2x/h - 1)^2 ab(1 - 4(x - h/2)^2/h^2.
>
> Hence (1/ab)y(x)^2 + (4/h^2)(x - h/2)^2 1 ...equation of an ellipse
>
> qed

We expect Tao, Wiles, Hales, Pipher, Ribet, Stillwell, to do a correct percentage of how much 938 is short of 945, but not Kibo Parry of Rensselaer-- perhaps the only engineer in the world that cannot do a percentage problem.

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 Parry wanting BALANCED JOURNALISM in sci.physics on Sheldon Glashow. Like his own Google search page shows Kibo to be a sickfuck on the first page, but Kibo wants that fine-tuned for Jan Burse (Mostowski Collapse) is shown as a sickfuck on the first entry of his Google search.

For Google does not tell us that Sheldon Glashow is so crippled in physics that his mind cannot even entertain the question of which is the atom's true 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. See any one of AP's published TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS (Amazon Kindle).

Why does Google have sugar coated boutique shops for failures of science, physics, math, when they have an obligation of Balanced Journalism with A COUNTERPOINT entry on first page of Sheldon Glashow.

Like Judy Woodruff on PBS Newshour is Balanced Reporting.

Kibo likes to see that sugar coated idiots of science and math such as Terence Tao, Andrew Wiles, Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow are in scope of True Journalism, for Google searches are not boutique stores of sugar coated garbage but of Point and Counterpoint. Like Kibo's and Jan's Google search revealing the "little farting men that they really are", or as James McGinn recently said in his spamming threads of weather in sci.physics-- Revealing the Asshole Hiding Within.

Re: Kibo Parry Moroney, not a comic, not a scientist, not a engineer but a evil stalker shithead that wants to torture more South Korean Moon Bears
#1-1, 148th published book Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, 9th edition 2021, Atom Totality Series,
1:12 AM

_Google Search for a Balanced report_ of "Kibo Parry" , 28 year nonstop stalker with incurable stalker disease, who fails at all math with his inability to even do a proper correct percentage.
PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 133 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor by
1:08 AM

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz sci.physics

Harvard's Dr. Hau and Berkeley's Sylvia Else do not do physics but just play ad hominem games
#1-1, 148th published book Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, 9th edition 2021, Atom Totality Series,
1:42 AM

6--Harvard's Dr. Hau and Berkeley's Sylvia Else do not do physics but just play ad hominem games
#1-1, 148th published book Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, 9th edition 2021, Atom Totality Series,
1:41 AM

Google, great job on Harvard Dr. Hau, lousy pitiful job on Thomas Hales, Sheldon Glashow as some propaganda pitch as if Search engines have become science-propaganda-kiosks, instead of Balanced Journalism with Counterpoint. Is Google trying to
PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 133 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor by
1:06 AM


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=99575&group=sci.math#99575

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2988:b0:6a0:53e7:ed48 with SMTP id r8-20020a05620a298800b006a053e7ed48mr11228797qkp.604.1652181207355;
Tue, 10 May 2022 04:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:5546:0:b0:64a:a5c5:7c34 with SMTP id
j67-20020a255546000000b0064aa5c57c34mr13336766ybb.154.1652181207158; Tue, 10
May 2022 04:13:27 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 04:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:387:c:6f13:0:0:0:3;
posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:387:c:6f13:0:0:0:3
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com>
<e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com> <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
<e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 11:13:27 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 4997
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Tue, 10 May 2022 11:13 UTC

#1-1, 148th published book

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

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

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

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

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

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

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08T82M2LP
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ January 16, 2021
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 872 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 329 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #203,710 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #289 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #1,716 in Physics (Books)

Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<f8cd85bd-0081-421b-a3de-29b77b138969n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=99610&group=sci.math#99610

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:c86:b0:69f:c7cb:935a with SMTP id q6-20020a05620a0c8600b0069fc7cb935amr16688093qki.229.1652209965848;
Tue, 10 May 2022 12:12:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:8207:0:b0:64a:475:83b3 with SMTP id
q7-20020a258207000000b0064a047583b3mr19873383ybk.628.1652209965646; Tue, 10
May 2022 12:12:45 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 12:12:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:387:f:5516:0:0:0:b;
posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:387:f:5516:0:0:0:b
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com>
<e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com> <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
<e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com> <12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f8cd85bd-0081-421b-a3de-29b77b138969n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 19:12:45 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 3245
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Tue, 10 May 2022 19:12 UTC

#1-2, 48th published book

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

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

1) A visual image of a Atom Totality

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

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

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

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

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

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

8) The Principle of Scooting-Over, applied.

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

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

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

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

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

Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<ce285e4e-4388-44a1-bafd-2099ff5fb27en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=99654&group=sci.math#99654

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:c86:b0:69f:c7cb:935a with SMTP id q6-20020a05620a0c8600b0069fc7cb935amr17962567qki.229.1652242681763;
Tue, 10 May 2022 21:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:136c:b0:649:81aa:5f7b with SMTP id
bt12-20020a056902136c00b0064981aa5f7bmr21744241ybb.303.1652242681568; Tue, 10
May 2022 21:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 21:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <f8cd85bd-0081-421b-a3de-29b77b138969n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:387:f:551a:0:0:0:9;
posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:387:f:551a:0:0:0:9
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com>
<e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com> <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
<e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com> <12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>
<f8cd85bd-0081-421b-a3de-29b77b138969n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ce285e4e-4388-44a1-bafd-2099ff5fb27en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 04:18:01 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2749
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Wed, 11 May 2022 04:18 UTC

#1-3, 74th published book

HISTORY OF THE PROTON MASS and the 945 MeV //Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

In 2016-2017, AP discovered that the real proton has a mass of 840 MeV, not 938. The real electron was actually the muon and the muon stays inside the proton that forms a proton torus of 8 rings and with the muon as bar magnet is a Faraday Law producing magnetic monopoles. So this book is all about why researchers of physics and engineers keep getting the number 938MeV when they should be getting the number 840 MeV + 105 MeV = 945 MeV.

Cover Picture is a proton torus of 8 rings with a muon of 1 ring inside the proton torus, doing the Faraday Law and producing magnetic monopoles.
Length: 17 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : December 18, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 17 pages
• File Size : 698 KB
• ASIN : B082WYGVNG
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<d3034da7-5762-4404-8e90-f2bd97d20496n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=99922&group=sci.math#99922

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1a9c:b0:2f3:d873:4acc with SMTP id s28-20020a05622a1a9c00b002f3d8734accmr3177766qtc.424.1652422694031;
Thu, 12 May 2022 23:18:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:561:b0:648:63ff:2b61 with SMTP id
a1-20020a056902056100b0064863ff2b61mr3219894ybt.30.1652422693832; Thu, 12 May
2022 23:18:13 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 23:18:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ce285e4e-4388-44a1-bafd-2099ff5fb27en@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:387:c:5519:0:0:0:3;
posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:387:c:5519:0:0:0:3
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com>
<e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com> <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
<e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com> <12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>
<f8cd85bd-0081-421b-a3de-29b77b138969n@googlegroups.com> <ce285e4e-4388-44a1-bafd-2099ff5fb27en@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d3034da7-5762-4404-8e90-f2bd97d20496n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 06:18:14 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Fri, 13 May 2022 06:18 UTC

Math con-artists of conic sections Andrew Wiles, Frances Kirwan, Terry J.Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose.

The math failure, con artist Andrew Wiles, get help from Frances Kirwan, Terry J.Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose to help the Wiles failure of geometry-- Oval is slant cut in Single Cone, never ellipse, because only the oval and single cone have 1 axis of symmetry, not 2 that the ellipse has.

Admit to Univ Oxford student newspaper that you all made a terrible mistake on geometry conics. Be honest and truthful in math, not corrupt and selfish and seeking fame-- never truth for that is the con-artist, not the scientist.

The reason that none of Andrew Wiles, Frances Kirwan, Terry J. Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose could never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, is that you are all to stupid to even see the oval is different from ellipse.

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)

Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

<81b2905c-b071-41d5-b82c-e82639f04d37n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=99973&group=sci.math#99973

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.math
X-Received: by 2002:a37:de0c:0:b0:69e:cd37:7646 with SMTP id h12-20020a37de0c000000b0069ecd377646mr5097450qkj.449.1652473753640;
Fri, 13 May 2022 13:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:4244:0:b0:64b:3af3:45a9 with SMTP id
p65-20020a254244000000b0064b3af345a9mr7081591yba.536.1652473753489; Fri, 13
May 2022 13:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <d3034da7-5762-4404-8e90-f2bd97d20496n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=107.115.239.45; posting-account=fsC03QkAAAAwkSNcSEKmlcR-W_HNitEd
NNTP-Posting-Host: 107.115.239.45
References: <d4fbd38c-57f0-4c4c-8c6b-f04dfedf5420@googlegroups.com>
<e5403e0b-2d39-4c20-8cfc-495d156633bd@googlegroups.com> <29d575ab-e65d-47fc-9910-fece4f289a7en@googlegroups.com>
<e91f5a00-0b94-459e-83a0-0ebfdcf2d6b3n@googlegroups.com> <12364039-06dd-42fb-96f3-2832559f4bd9n@googlegroups.com>
<f8cd85bd-0081-421b-a3de-29b77b138969n@googlegroups.com> <ce285e4e-4388-44a1-bafd-2099ff5fb27en@googlegroups.com>
<d3034da7-5762-4404-8e90-f2bd97d20496n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <81b2905c-b071-41d5-b82c-e82639f04d37n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
From: plutoniu...@gmail.com (Archimedes Plutonium)
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 20:29:13 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 11599
 by: Archimedes Plutonium - Fri, 13 May 2022 20:29 UTC

Frances Kirwan, Terry J.Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose

Math con-artists of conic sections Andrew Wiles, Frances Kirwan, Terry J.Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose. Why not come clean on your gross error and mistake for a single cone has 1 axis of symmetry, same as oval, but ellipse has 2 axes of symmetry.

Apparently Oxford likes playing Big Lies as here in America where the corrupt Trump plays the world as fools. Same as Andrew Wiles playing the world for math fools with his ellipse a conic. And Andrew pays a huge price for his math ignorance and corruption for Andrew can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for hells bells, he cannot even tell the difference between a ellipse and a oval.
>
> The math failure, con artist Andrew Wiles, get help from Frances Kirwan, Terry J.Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose to help the Wiles failure of geometry-- Oval is slant cut in Single Cone, never ellipse, because only the oval and single cone have 1 axis of symmetry, not 2 that the ellipse has.
>
> Admit to Univ Oxford student newspaper that you all made a terrible mistake on geometry conics. Be honest and truthful in math, not corrupt and selfish and seeking fame-- never truth for that is the con-artist, not the scientist.
>
> The reason that none of Andrew Wiles, Frances Kirwan, Terry J. Lyons, Ben Green, Roger Penrose could never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, is that you are all to stupid to even see the oval is different from ellipse.

Joseph D. Harris, Walter E. Lawrence, David C. Montgomery, Gary Alan Wegner
Dartmouth College, why not admit the truth Oval is the slant cut in single cone, never the ellipse. Dartmouth -- __truth always wins__ and your actions of hiring or __complacent with__ hate-stalker criminals of Kibo Parry M. or Jan Burse or Dan Christensen or their dozen allies of hatred, only shows that Dartmouth College is no longer in the business of science and truth but has gone corrupt.

Not much difference between the corrupt Donald Trump and his mindless "big lie" and Dartmouth College with their mindless big lie of ellipse a conic section.

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)

Univ Oxford-- why not tell the truth of science instead of being complacent or hiring a moron paid for hate-stalker like Kibo Parry M. You must know, truth always wins.
On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 4:59:49 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>why do you have to be such a crybaby about the ellipse being a conic
> section?

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor