I was looking through the Internet last night for these fake proofs if they were all Reductio Ad Absurdum, or Contrapositive method, or some call it the Indirect method.

I had known that Wiles FLT was Reductio Ad Absurdum and also the Appel & Haken fake 4 Color Mapping was RAA, also. I was not sure of these others. So I looked via Google to see if all the recent fake proofs of math were all of one method-- Reductio Ad Absurdum. And if all are such, well, that is very telling of how modern day Con-Art Math is established. It is established through a method of proof that is not valid method. The method itself is a con-art.

1) Andrew Wiles elliptic curves FLT Fermat's Last Theorem-- is a Reductio Ad Absurdum, hence con-art fakery.

2) Appel & Haken 4 Color Mapping is Reductio Ad Absurdum, hence con-art math.

3) Green-Tao primes any length of arithmetic sequence is Reductio Ad Absurdum, hence con-art fake math.

4) Thomas Hales Kepler Packing offering is Reductio Ad Absurdum, hence con-art worthless and fake math.

But looking even deeper, there are fake proofs built on more fake proofs. For that Wiles needed the fake proof of Ribet theorem, where Ken Ribet uses Reductio Ad Absurdum to build up Wiles fake proof. So we have layers and layers of Reductio Ad Absurdum for Wiles to add on another RAA for his fakery..

And the same with Green-Tao using the fake Szemeredi theorem which is a reductio ad absurdum proof and hence fake.

So we have not only a singular use of Reductio Ad Absurdum to create fake worthless con-art math proofs, but we have a cascading mountain of RAA to contrive more con-art fake math proofs.

Now, most people are not logical. And unfortunately, most mathematicians are not logical although they have potential of becoming logical, most mathematicians never reach the heights of being logical.

That being said, we must show not only mathematicians but laypersons on how to be more logical.

And the best way of showing this is through common language. And the best example I can give of this RAA nonsense is the tv show "Death in Paradise" where every week the show has the inspector solve a crime mystery. This is an example of an excellent "natural language example of Reductio Ad Absurdum" and multiple RAA used.

Even Wiles, Tao, Hales can learn from this tv show why their proof is worthless garbage.

A few weeks back Death in Paradise had a nurse die of poison in her locked stateroom. The locked door is a RAA that her brother did not do it, nor anyone else. The suicide note left behind is a RAA that she committed suicide. So we have 2 RAA and thus a Wiles or Hales or Tao would conclude suicide just as their fake math proofs of RAA. And this is why RAA is not a valid proof of mathematics as AP wrote in his RAA book.

Another few weeks back in Death in Paradise was a journalist reporter who was killed at her own home found in the swimming pool. The death was estimated at a specific time that a RAA excluded the radio announcer. An RAA excluded the daughter of the radio announcer. And so a Wiles and Tao and Hales logic would, like their fake math proofs, exonerate the radio announcer and his daughter.

You see, Reductio Ad Absurdum is not deductive logic, but probability and uncertain logic. Read AP's book on RAA.

5th published book

Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Teaching True Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 29Mar2021. This is AP's 5th published book of science.
Preface:
First comes Logic-- think straight and clear which many logic and math professors are deaf dumb and blind to, and simply refuse to recognize and fix their errors.

The single biggest error of Old Logic of Boole and Jevons was their "AND" and "OR" connectors. They got them mixed up and turned around. For their logic ends up being that of 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = either 3 or 2 but never 5, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 (addition) with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 (subtraction). The AND connector in Logic stems from the idea, the mechanism involved, that given a series of statements, if just one of those many statements has a true truth value, then the entire string of statements is overall true, and thus AND truth table is truly TTTF and never TFFF. And secondly, their error of the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a probability end conclusion.

My corrections of Old Logic have a history that dates before 1993, sometime around 1991, I realized the Euclid proof of infinitude of primes was illogical, sadly sadly wrong, in that the newly formed number by "multiply the lot and add 1" was necessarily a new prime in the indirect proof method. So that my history of fixing Old Logic starts in 1991, but comes to a synthesis of correcting all four of the connectors of Equal/not, And, Or, If->Then, by 2015.

Cover picture: some may complain my covers are less in quality, but I have a good reason for those covers-- I would like covers of math or logic to show the teacher's own handwriting as if he were back in the classroom writing on the blackboard or an overhead projector.

Length: 72 pages

File Size: 773 KB
Print Length: 72 pages
Publication Date: March 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PMB69F5
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 



#6-2, 27th published book

Correcting Reductio Ad Absurdum// Teaching True Logic series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 9NOV2020. This is AP's 27th published book.

Preface:
These are the TRUE Truth Tables of the 4 connectors of Logic

Equal+Not                    
T = T  =  T                      
T = ~F = T                      
F = ~T = T
F = F   = T   

If--> then                  
T --> T  = T
T --> F  = F
F --> T  = U  (unknown or uncertain)           
F --> F  = U  (unknown or uncertain)

And
T  &  T = T                       
T  &  F = T                      
F  &  T = T                      
F  &  F = F                      

Or
T  or  T  = F
T  or  F  = T
F  or  T  = T
F  or  F  = F

Those can be analyzed as being Equal+Not is multiplication. If-->then is division. And is addition and Or is subtraction in mathematics. Now I need to emphasis this error of Old Logic, the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a probability unknown, undefined end conclusion.

Now in Old Logic they had for Reductio Ad Absurdum as displayed by this schematic:

|    | ~p
|    |---
|    | .
|    | .
|    | q
|    | .
|    | .
|    | ~q
| p

Which is fine except for the error of not indicating the end conclusion of "p" is only a probability of being true, not guaranteed as true. And this is the huge huge error that mathematicians have fallen victim of. For the Reductio Ad Absurdum is not a proof method for mathematics, it is probability of being true or false. Math works on guaranteed truth, not probability. This textbook is written to fix that error.
Length: 86 pages

Product details
• ASIN : B07Q18GQ7S
• Publication date : March 23, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1178 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 86 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #346,875 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #28 in Logic (Kindle Store)
◦ #95 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #217 in Mathematical Logic
•

y  z
|  /
| /
|/______ x

More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.

In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.  And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.

There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe  
Archimedes Plutonium