1-Time to remove Physics professors from their teaching post if they cannot admit to errors of physics (1 angular momentum proves real proton is 840MeV, real electron is muon (2 Lewis 6 Structure is true, not Lewis 8. College presidents do pink slips

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Archimedes Plutonium

2021-03-15 19:39:59 UTC

1-Time to remove Physics professors from their teaching post if they cannot admit to errors of physics (1 angular momentum proves real proton is 840MeV, real electron is muon (2 Lewis 6 Structure is true, not Lewis 8. College presidents do pink slips

62nd published book

Elementary Angular-Momentum with Force of Gravity// Angular-Momentum equals Electric Field// Physics series for High School, Book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Angular-Momentum is tough physics. So tough that no physicist of the 20th century knew what it truly was. And believe you me, there were some great mathematical physicists such as Dirac and Feynman and Bohr and Pauli. The reason it was tough, for it had a missing term in it, electric current. This book is not going to go into depth and detail of Angular Momentum or Gravity, but only to get the student a comfortable awareness of what angular-momentum and gravity is, and how it works. After reading this small book and, later, if you want depth and detail of Angular Momentum and Gravity, please see AP's textbook of " Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3, 2019, Kindle Edition, by Archimedes Plutonium.

The mathematics involved in Angular-Momentum and Gravity is too hard for High School, so hard, that it should be spared of all mathematics, and just a geometry description should be given to High School. And only at the end of Freshperson Physics in College should the mathematics of Angular Momentum and Gravity be given in College 1st year Physics. Spared so that the student is in synch with AP's Freshperson Calculus text which the AP-EM equations are at the end of that textbook. In synch reading of 1st year college calculus and 1st year college physics, do we reach a synchronous moment of education teaching to handle the math of Angular-Momentum and Gravity. So in this text, I will speak about the geometry of Angular Momentum and the geometry of Gravity and that is easy to understand. I am not going to go into any mathematical calculations nor the equations of electricity and magnetism that governs Angular Momentum and Gravity. Only a geometry understanding of Angular-Momentum and Gravity.

Cover picture is the planet Uranus with several of its satellites. It is Uranus that proves to us what angular-momentum and gravity truly are, and teaches us what gravity truly is-- it is electricity and magnetism.
Length: 16 pages

Product details
• File Size : 959 KB
• ASIN : B07XT4SP6N
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 16 pages
• Publication Date : September 11, 2019
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Simultaneous Device Usage : Unlimited
• Language: : English
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #171,127 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #2 in 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #12 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #21 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)

2nd published book

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

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

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

Length: 1150 pages

Product details
• File Size : 2167 KB
• ASIN : B07PLVMMSZ
• Publication Date : March 11, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 1150 pages
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,212 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#181 in General Chemistry & Reference
#1324 in General Chemistry
#1656 in Physics (Kindle Store)
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 2:47:24 PM (yesterday)



to
Units for acceleration are A = meters/sec^2

In Angular Momentum we turn that around to be meters^2/sec. We square the meters and leave the seconds alone.

So, well Angular Momentum is the driving force behind all of Quantum Mechanics for its units are angular momentum and that should be of no surprise to any one in physics who knows the primal axiom of physics. All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.

Both electricity and magnetism are closed look circuits, and that means a math-form of x^2/A^2 where x is the variable and A is the constant so in effect the angular momentum is a math of closed loop circuitry.

So let us just see why the 0.5MeV particle cannot be the electron of atoms and why the muon stuck and trapped inside a 840MeV proton torus must be the true electron of atoms.

For proton we have 840MeV *( meters^2/second)

For muon we have 105MeV * (meters^2/second)

For Dirac magnetic monopole mistaken as the electron we have 0.5MeV * (meters^2/second)

What I am going to demonstrate with this math is not only is the Rutherford-Bohr Model of atom a charlatan fraud for it is impossible given the above math. But that the very concept of Angular Momentum that all of Quantum Mechanics is based upon is a error filled fraud.

As for the second test of whether a Physics professor should stay or be fired out of physics is just a simple test of logic. For it is well known that the CO and N2 molecules have the highest dissociation energy in chemistry. If Lewis 6 Structure is true, then CO and N2 do indeed have the highest dissociation bond energy as we place 6 Lewis Arms in a hand held model. But if Lewis 8 Structure were the truth then we must have O2 has a higher dissociation energy than is CO or N2. Simple logic, but every physics and chemistry professor around the globe espouses and teaches Lewis 8 Structure. They should all be given a pink slip by the President of their colleges if they cannot publically admit to the truth about Lewis 6 Structure, and should not pollute the minds of our young students any further.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 3:17:12 PM (yesterday)



to

Units for acceleration are A = meters/sec^2
In Angular Momentum we turn that around to be meters^2/sec. We square the meters and leave the seconds alone.
So, well Angular Momentum is the driving force behind all of Quantum Mechanics for its units are angular momentum and that should be of no surprise to any one in physics who knows the primal axiom of physics. All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
Both electricity and magnetism are closed look circuits, and that means a math-form of x^2/A^2 where x is the variable and A is the constant so in effect the angular momentum is a math of closed loop circuitry.
So let us just see why the 0.5MeV particle cannot be the electron of atoms and why the muon stuck and trapped inside a 840MeV proton torus must be the true electron of atoms.
For proton we have 840MeV *( meters^2/second)
For muon we have 105MeV * (meters^2/second)
For Dirac magnetic monopole mistaken as the electron we have 0.5MeV * (meters^2/second)

Now the recorded known speed of the 0.5MeV particle is nearly that of the speed of light. But that makes commonsense because Dirac Magnetic Monopoles are photon particles, some monopoles some dipoles.

So if we reverse the speed of light 3.16*10^8 m/s as that of 3.16*10^-9 in number value we see that our math for the 0.5 particle incorrectly deemed the electron of atoms would be a tiny number of

0.5MeV * 3.16*10^-9 for angular momentum.

On the other hand with proton at 840MeV and muon as true real electron the angular momentum of both are near equal to one another, provided that we keep the velocity of muon as 8 times that of the velocity of proton.

Now in Faraday's law, you do not create new electricity if the speed of the proton with its 8 rings is the same speed as the muon trapped inside thrusting through the proton. For if the proton speed matches the muon speed there is no electricity produced for there is no thrusting, everything is relatively staying the same, no motion detected.

But, however, if the speed of the proton is considered stationary, and the speed of the muon considered to be 8. Then we have a meters^2/second = 8

What I am going to demonstrate with this math is not only is the Rutherford-Bohr Model of atom a charlatan fraud for it is impossible given the above math. But that the very concept of Angular Momentum that all of Quantum Mechanics is based upon is a error filled fraud.
As for the second test of whether a Physics professor should stay or be fired out of physics is just a simple test of logic. For it is well known that the CO and N2 molecules have the highest dissociation energy in chemistry. If Lewis 6 Structure is true, then CO and N2 do indeed have the highest dissociation bond energy as we place 6 Lewis Arms in a hand held model. But if Lewis 8 Structure were the truth then we must have O2 has a higher dissociation energy than is CO or N2. Simple logic, but every physics and chemistry professor around the globe espouses and teaches Lewis 8 Structure. They should all be given a pink slip by the President of their colleges if they cannot publically admit to the truth about Lewis 6 Structure, and should not pollute the minds of our young students any further.

Of course the math and logic of Lewis 6 Structure versus Lewis 8 Structure is High School logic and math, yet College physics and College Chemistry professors failed that test ever since accurate dissociation energies were tabulated. When was that? The 1916 with Lewis's The Atom and the Molecule when we had accurate enough dissociation energy experiments? Even Lewis himself should have corrected his Lewis 8 arms when there were only 6 arms.

I was looking for a History of bond dissociation energy of chemistry. Apparently chemists never see dating their science with any priority concerns. So I am guessing that only recently say 1950s and thereafter is bond dissociation energy in Chemistry a accurate science. This would explain why Lewis decided on 8 rather than on the number 6.

AP is mystified by the fact that proton and muon have a factor of 8 in common. And the wrong Lewis Structure of 8. So is there some connection as to why Chemistry chose 8 when it is 6.

1> AP
1> King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 4:08:39 PM (yesterday)



to

So, I just cannot help but wonder, if the mistaken 8 in Lewis Structure is the exact factor I need to Equilibrate the Proton Angular Momentum to be the same as the Muon Angular Momentum.

And if we Equilibrate muon to proton angular momentum, do we achieve that lofty principle of Maximum Production of Electricity of muon doing Faraday law inside a proton torus? This idea has bugged and nagged me for almost 4 years now ever since 2018.

I do not need a 8 in Lewis Structure but I do need a 8 in angular momentum of muon versus proton.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 8:28:14 PM (yesterday)



to

Going to explore this in far more detail, for I simply need the number 8 to make the Angular Momentum of Muon equal to angular momentum of proton. Whereas Chemistry does not need 8, but rather, needs the number 6 for Lewis bonding structure. I looked this up before under the "octet rule" of chemistry. But no harm in reviewing.

I find it highly highly unlikely that chemistry thinks it needs 8 when it needs 6, yet physics needs that 8 for angular momentum.

Could it be that the Chemists were doing Quantum Mechanics of 8 with angular momentum and not with that of their crazy muddle headed electrons of 0.5MeV when the true electron is the muon trapped inside a proton torus.

So what I am thinking on re reading this explanation in Wikipedia, is that the octet rule was never about bonding but all about the velocity of the muon traveling around inside a proton torus and doing the Faraday law. A "closed inert gas configuration" was never about 0.5MeV particles bonding, but about that Muon velocity as it thrusts through those 8 rings that compose a proton torus and every time the muon thrusts through a individual proton ring a electric current is produced. So 8 electric currents are produced in one cycle of a muon thrusting.

Lewis thought he needed 8 when in truth, he needed 6.

AP needs 8 for muon to proton angular momentum, so I think I have found the 8, I need.

--- quoting Wikipedia on octet rule ---
History

Newlands' law of octaves
In 1864, the English chemist John Newlands classified the sixty-two known elements into eight groups, based on their physical properties.

In the late 19th century, it was known that coordination compounds (formerly called “molecular compounds”) were formed by the combination of atoms or molecules in such a manner that the valencies of the atoms involved apparently became satisfied. In 1893, Alfred Werner showed that the number of atoms or groups associated with a central atom (the “coordination number”) is often 4 or 6; other coordination numbers up to a maximum of 8 were known, but less frequent.[8] In 1904, Richard Abegg was one of the first to extend the concept of coordination number to a concept of valence in which he distinguished atoms as electron donors or acceptors, leading to positive and negative valence states that greatly resemble the modern concept of oxidation states. Abegg noted that the difference between the maximum positive and negative valences of an element under his model is frequently eight.[9] In 1916, Gilbert N. Lewis referred to this insight as Abegg's rule and used it to help formulate his cubical atom model and the "rule of eight", which began to distinguish between valence and valence electrons. In 1919, Irving Langmuir refined these concepts further and renamed them the "cubical octet atom" and "octet theory". The "octet theory" evolved into what is now known as the "octet rule".

Walther Kossel and Gilbert N. Lewis saw that noble gases did not have the tendency of taking part in chemical reactions under ordinary conditions. On the basis of this observation, they concluded that atoms of noble gases are stable and on the basis of this conclusion they proposed a theory of valency known as "electronic theory of valency" in 1916:

During the formation of a chemical bond, atoms combine together by gaining, losing or sharing electrons in such a way that they acquire nearest noble gas configuration.
Explanation in quantum theory
The quantum theory of the atom explains the eight electrons as a closed shell with an s2p6 electron configuration. A closed-shell configuration is one in which low-lying energy levels are full and higher energy levels are empty. For example, the neon atom ground state has a full n = 2 shell (2s2 2p6) and an empty n = 3 shell. According to the octet rule, the atoms immediately before and after neon in the periodic table (i.e. C, N, O, F, Na, Mg and Al), tend to attain a similar configuration by gaining, losing, or sharing electrons.

The argon atom has an analogous 3s2 3p6 configuration. There is also an empty 3d level, but it is at considerably higher energy than 3s and 3p (unlike in the hydrogen atom), so that 3s2 3p6 is still considered a closed shell for chemical purposes. The atoms immediately before and after argon tend to attain this configuration in compounds. There are, however, some hypervalent molecules in which the 3d level may play a part in the bonding, although this is controversial (see below).

For helium there is no 1p level according to the quantum theory, so that 1s2 is a closed shell with no p electrons. The atoms before and after helium (H and Li) follow a duet rule and tend to have the same 1s2 configuration as helium.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 10:43:40 PM (yesterday)



to

--- quoting Wikipedia on octet rule ---
History
Newlands' law of octaves
In 1864, the English chemist John Newlands classified the sixty-two known elements into eight groups, based on their physical properties.
In the late 19th century, it was known that coordination compounds (formerly called “molecular compounds”) were formed by the combination of atoms or molecules in such a manner that the valencies of the atoms involved apparently became satisfied. In 1893, Alfred Werner showed that the number of atoms or groups associated with a central atom (the “coordination number”) is often 4 or 6; other coordination numbers up to a maximum of 8 were known, but less frequent.[8] In 1904, Richard Abegg was one of the first to extend the concept of coordination number to a concept of valence in which he distinguished atoms as electron donors or acceptors, leading to positive and negative valence states that greatly resemble the modern concept of oxidation states. Abegg noted that the difference between the maximum positive and negative valences of an element under his model is frequently eight. In 1916, Gilbert N. Lewis referred to this insight as Abegg's rule and used it to help formulate his cubical atom model and the "rule of eight", which began to distinguish between valence and valence electrons. In 1919, Irving Langmuir refined these concepts further and renamed them the "cubical octet atom" and "octet theory". The "octet theory" evolved into what is now known as the "octet rule".
During the formation of a chemical bond, atoms combine together by gaining, losing or sharing electrons in such a way that they acquire nearest noble gas configuration.
Explanation in quantum theory
The quantum theory of the atom explains the eight electrons as a closed shell with an s2p6 electron configuration. A closed-shell configuration is one in which low-lying energy levels are full and higher energy levels are empty. For example, the neon atom ground state has a full n = 2 shell (2s2 2p6) and an empty n = 3 shell. According to the octet rule, the atoms immediately before and after neon in the periodic table (i.e. C, N, O, F, Na, Mg and Al), tend to attain a similar configuration by gaining, losing, or sharing electrons.
The argon atom has an analogous 3s2 3p6 configuration. There is also an empty 3d level, but it is at considerably higher energy than 3s and 3p (unlike in the hydrogen atom), so that 3s2 3p6 is still considered a closed shell for chemical purposes. The atoms immediately before and after argon tend to attain this configuration in compounds. There are, however, some hypervalent molecules in which the 3d level may play a part in the bonding, although this is controversial (see below).
For helium there is no 1p level according to the quantum theory, so that 1s2 is a closed shell with no p electrons. The atoms before and after helium (H and Li) follow a duet rule and tend to have the same 1s2 configuration as helium.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---

Archimedes Plutonium

2021-03-15 20:46:36 UTC

Permalink

No-one in the 20th century physics understood what Angular Momentum was. Not even AP who was borne 1950, not until about 2017 and thereafter did a single person in physics start to wake up about angular momentum and to start to get it correct. And even as I write this in 2021, there are still shadowy spots of "what is angular momentum". It is an extremely extremely difficult concept for humans to grapple with, for it is not just a physical notion of speed of energy, but a notion of a force like gravity or like electric field. And there again, no-one in the 20th century actually had a handle on electric field. Oh, yes, they all could understand magnetic field, that is the easy one as we see the Lines of Force, but the electric field was so so difficult a notion or common experience to relate to.

And the 20th century had great talent of physicists with incredible math skills of Planck and Rutherford and Bohr and Pauli and Fermi and Dirac and Feynman and John Bell, enormous talent, but not a one of them aware of "what is angular momentum". Because to be aware of Angular Momentum, you would be aware that it is impossible to have the electron of atoms at 0.5MeV flying around a dense nucleus at nearly the speed of light and still stay together as a atom, impossible. So if anyone, anyone at all thinks they know what angular momentum is, would know that the real proton of hydrogen atom is 840MeV as a torus of 8 rings, each ring being 105MeV as a torus ring and trapped inside that torus is the true electron of atoms as the muon of 105MeV, and performing a job, a task, a function of being a bar magnet muon to the proton's being a Faraday coil and producing electricity everytime the muon goes round and round inside the proton torus. It was impossible in the 20th century to know what Angular Momentum was, yet have a Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, just crazily impossible. Either you held the idiotic electron at 0.5MeV flying around a proton at 938MeV at close to speed of light, never constrained by the proton, or, as when you trap a muon inside a 840MeV proton torus.

Not until starting 2017, could AP begin to find out what Angular Momentum truly is, for you can never know angular momentum in a physics world where idiots think that a proton and neutron and electron have no job, no task, no function but just sitting around lazily like some tourists on a beach sipping lemonade in a nucleus or a 0.5MeV particle flying around outside the nucleus at close to speed of light.

Speed in physics is truly distance/time or meters/second and when we take the derivative of speed we get acceleration as a=m/s^2. The rate of change of speed is acceleration. But now, what if we turned acceleration around to be m^2/second, we square the distance and leave the seconds time alone? Well, we get a parameter that is the heart of Angular Momentum as meters^2 / seconds.

No-one in the 20th century ever really understood what m^2/s was. They all said it was something going around in circles. The all said it was area divided by time, but never comprehended it in a physical meaning.

What is m^2/s and that is answered by saying meter^2/second is a speed, a velocity, but not the usual speed and velocity of distance/time. For m^2/s is a speed of energy. Meters^2 is a area and if you know physics, area is energy and so is volume is energy. Area is energy and so we can replace meter^2/second replace that with Energy/second.

That is what made angular momentum one of the most difficult concepts in all of physics. Angular Momentum is a speed of energy. But energy that is electricity and magnetism, so that compounds the difficulty.

Angular momentum is the Electric Field of physics. And is main component of the force of gravity. Angular momentum is the solar rays turned into circular Lines of Force that penetrate through and out of the solid Earth giving it both a push in its orbit and a pull on Earth to make it orbit around the Sun. Angular Momentum as Electric field is gravity.

AP
King of Science, especially Physics

earle

2021-03-15 21:01:33 UTC

Permalink

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
No-one in the 20th century physics understood what Angular Momentum was. Not even AP who was borne 1950, not until about 2017 and thereafter did a single person in physics start to wake up about angular momentum and to start to get it correct. And even as I write this in 2021, there are still shadowy spots of "what is angular momentum". It is an extremely extremely difficult concept for humans to grapple with, for it is not just a physical notion of speed of energy, but a notion of a force like gravity or like electric field. And there again, no-one in the 20th century actually had a handle on electric field. Oh, yes, they all could understand magnetic field, that is the easy one as we see the Lines of Force, but the electric field was so so difficult a notion or common experience to relate to.
And the 20th century had great talent of physicists with incredible math skills of Planck and Rutherford and Bohr and Pauli and Fermi and Dirac and Feynman and John Bell, enormous talent, but not a one of them aware of "what is angular momentum". Because to be aware of Angular Momentum, you would be aware that it is impossible to have the electron of atoms at 0.5MeV flying around a dense nucleus at nearly the speed of light and still stay together as a atom, impossible. So if anyone, anyone at all thinks they know what angular momentum is, would know that the real proton of hydrogen atom is 840MeV as a torus of 8 rings, each ring being 105MeV as a torus ring and trapped inside that torus is the true electron of atoms as the muon of 105MeV, and performing a job, a task, a function of being a bar magnet muon to the proton's being a Faraday coil and producing electricity everytime the muon goes round and round inside the proton torus. It was impossible in the 20th century to know what Angular Momentum was, yet have a Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, just crazily impossible. Either you held the idiotic electron at 0.5MeV flying around a proton at 938MeV at close to speed of light, never constrained by the proton, or, as when you trap a muon inside a 840MeV proton torus.
Not until starting 2017, could AP begin to find out what Angular Momentum truly is, for you can never know angular momentum in a physics world where idiots think that a proton and neutron and electron have no job, no task, no function but just sitting around lazily like some tourists on a beach sipping lemonade in a nucleus or a 0.5MeV particle flying around outside the nucleus at close to speed of light.
Speed in physics is truly distance/time or meters/second and when we take the derivative of speed we get acceleration as a=m/s^2. The rate of change of speed is acceleration. But now, what if we turned acceleration around to be m^2/second, we square the distance and leave the seconds time alone? Well, we get a parameter that is the heart of Angular Momentum as meters^2 / seconds.
No-one in the 20th century ever really understood what m^2/s was. They all said it was something going around in circles. The all said it was area divided by time, but never comprehended it in a physical meaning.
What is m^2/s and that is answered by saying meter^2/second is a speed, a velocity, but not the usual speed and velocity of distance/time. For m^2/s is a speed of energy. Meters^2 is a area and if you know physics, area is energy and so is volume is energy. Area is energy and so we can replace meter^2/second replace that with Energy/second.
That is what made angular momentum one of the most difficult concepts in all of physics. Angular Momentum is a speed of energy. But energy that is electricity and magnetism, so that compounds the difficulty.
Angular momentum is the Electric Field of physics. And is main component of the force of gravity. Angular momentum is the solar rays turned into circular Lines of Force that penetrate through and out of the solid Earth giving it both a push in its orbit and a pull on Earth to make it orbit around the Sun. Angular Momentum as Electric field is gravity.
AP
King of Science, especially Physics

*
AP:

I'm sure you are familiar with the earth's magnetic field -- average about a half Gauss.
What do you know about the earth's electrostatic field? Have you heard of the Lenard effect?
(From Philipp Lenard, Hungarian Physicist, Nobel Prize, 1905.)
By the way, please don't wait for the Astrazeneca vaccination.

from the NY Times:

Germany, France and Italy paused use of AstraZenecas vaccine over concerns that it might be tied to blood clots. Experts havent found a causal link.

earle
*

Archimedes Plutonium

2021-03-15 21:16:10 UTC

Permalink

No what Fetter, Lipa, Little, Osheroff, Ritson, Schwettman, Turneaure, Wagoner, Yearian, Drell, Tessier-Lavigne need is a pink slip of physics failures.

Post by earle
I'm sure you are familiar with the earth's magnetic field -- average about a half Gauss.
What do you know about the earth's electrostatic field? Have you heard of the Lenard effect?
(From Philipp Lenard, Hungarian Physicist, Nobel Prize, 1905.)

AP writes: Earle, you expect Stanford Univ nitwits to reason about Lenard effect when those very same nitwits of physics cannot even "assemble the logical reasoning that since CO and N2 have the highest bond dissociation energy" yet Stanford nitwits of physics teaching Lewis 8 Structure." No what Fetter, Lipa, Little, Osheroff, Ritson, Schwettman, Turneaure, Wagoner, Yearian, Drell, Tessier-Lavigne need is a pink slip of physics failures.

President: Marc Tessier-Lavigne (neuroscience)
Provost: Persis Drell (physics)

Stanford Univ physics dept.

Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Stanley Wojcicki, Mason Yearian

cannot admit to errors of physics (1 angular momentum proves real proton is 840MeV, real electron is muon (2 Lewis 6 Structure is true, not Lewis 8. College presidents do pink slips
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Subscribe

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
2:40 PM (1 hour ago)



to

1-Time to remove Physics professors from their teaching post if they cannot admit to errors of physics (1 angular momentum proves real proton is 840MeV, real electron is muon (2 Lewis 6 Structure is true, not Lewis 8. College presidents do pink slips

62nd published book

Elementary Angular-Momentum with Force of Gravity// Angular-Momentum equals Electric Field// Physics series for High School, Book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Angular-Momentum is tough physics. So tough that no physicist of the 20th century knew what it truly was. And believe you me, there were some great mathematical physicists such as Dirac and Feynman and Bohr and Pauli. The reason it was tough, for it had a missing term in it, electric current. This book is not going to go into depth and detail of Angular Momentum or Gravity, but only to get the student a comfortable awareness of what angular-momentum and gravity is, and how it works. After reading this small book and, later, if you want depth and detail of Angular Momentum and Gravity, please see AP's textbook of " Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3, 2019, Kindle Edition, by Archimedes Plutonium.

The mathematics involved in Angular-Momentum and Gravity is too hard for High School, so hard, that it should be spared of all mathematics, and just a geometry description should be given to High School. And only at the end of Freshperson Physics in College should the mathematics of Angular Momentum and Gravity be given in College 1st year Physics. Spared so that the student is in synch with AP's Freshperson Calculus text which the AP-EM equations are at the end of that textbook. In synch reading of 1st year college calculus and 1st year college physics, do we reach a synchronous moment of education teaching to handle the math of Angular-Momentum and Gravity. So in this text, I will speak about the geometry of Angular Momentum and the geometry of Gravity and that is easy to understand. I am not going to go into any mathematical calculations nor the equations of electricity and magnetism that governs Angular Momentum and Gravity. Only a geometry understanding of Angular-Momentum and Gravity.

Cover picture is the planet Uranus with several of its satellites. It is Uranus that proves to us what angular-momentum and gravity truly are, and teaches us what gravity truly is-- it is electricity and magnetism.
Length: 16 pages

Product details
• File Size : 959 KB
• ASIN : B07XT4SP6N
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 16 pages
• Publication Date : September 11, 2019
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Simultaneous Device Usage : Unlimited
• Language: : English
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #171,127 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #2 in 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #12 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #21 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)

2nd published book

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

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

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

Length: 1150 pages

Product details
• File Size : 2167 KB
• ASIN : B07PLVMMSZ
• Publication Date : March 11, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 1150 pages
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,212 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#181 in General Chemistry & Reference
#1324 in General Chemistry
#1656 in Physics (Kindle Store)
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 2:47:24 PM (yesterday)



to
Units for acceleration are A = meters/sec^2

In Angular Momentum we turn that around to be meters^2/sec. We square the meters and leave the seconds alone.

So, well Angular Momentum is the driving force behind all of Quantum Mechanics for its units are angular momentum and that should be of no surprise to any one in physics who knows the primal axiom of physics. All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.

Both electricity and magnetism are closed look circuits, and that means a math-form of x^2/A^2 where x is the variable and A is the constant so in effect the angular momentum is a math of closed loop circuitry.

So let us just see why the 0.5MeV particle cannot be the electron of atoms and why the muon stuck and trapped inside a 840MeV proton torus must be the true electron of atoms.

For proton we have 840MeV *( meters^2/second)

For muon we have 105MeV * (meters^2/second)

For Dirac magnetic monopole mistaken as the electron we have 0.5MeV * (meters^2/second)

What I am going to demonstrate with this math is not only is the Rutherford-Bohr Model of atom a charlatan fraud for it is impossible given the above math. But that the very concept of Angular Momentum that all of Quantum Mechanics is based upon is a error filled fraud.

As for the second test of whether a Physics professor should stay or be fired out of physics is just a simple test of logic. For it is well known that the CO and N2 molecules have the highest dissociation energy in chemistry. If Lewis 6 Structure is true, then CO and N2 do indeed have the highest dissociation bond energy as we place 6 Lewis Arms in a hand held model. But if Lewis 8 Structure were the truth then we must have O2 has a higher dissociation energy than is CO or N2. Simple logic, but every physics and chemistry professor around the globe espouses and teaches Lewis 8 Structure. They should all be given a pink slip by the President of their colleges if they cannot publically admit to the truth about Lewis 6 Structure, and should not pollute the minds of our young students any further.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 3:17:12 PM (yesterday)



to

Post by earle
Units for acceleration are A = meters/sec^2
In Angular Momentum we turn that around to be meters^2/sec. We square the meters and leave the seconds alone.
So, well Angular Momentum is the driving force behind all of Quantum Mechanics for its units are angular momentum and that should be of no surprise to any one in physics who knows the primal axiom of physics. All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
Both electricity and magnetism are closed look circuits, and that means a math-form of x^2/A^2 where x is the variable and A is the constant so in effect the angular momentum is a math of closed loop circuitry.
So let us just see why the 0.5MeV particle cannot be the electron of atoms and why the muon stuck and trapped inside a 840MeV proton torus must be the true electron of atoms.
For proton we have 840MeV *( meters^2/second)
For muon we have 105MeV * (meters^2/second)
For Dirac magnetic monopole mistaken as the electron we have 0.5MeV * (meters^2/second)

Post by earle
What I am going to demonstrate with this math is not only is the Rutherford-Bohr Model of atom a charlatan fraud for it is impossible given the above math. But that the very concept of Angular Momentum that all of Quantum Mechanics is based upon is a error filled fraud.
As for the second test of whether a Physics professor should stay or be fired out of physics is just a simple test of logic. For it is well known that the CO and N2 molecules have the highest dissociation energy in chemistry. If Lewis 6 Structure is true, then CO and N2 do indeed have the highest dissociation bond energy as we place 6 Lewis Arms in a hand held model. But if Lewis 8 Structure were the truth then we must have O2 has a higher dissociation energy than is CO or N2. Simple logic, but every physics and chemistry professor around the globe espouses and teaches Lewis 8 Structure. They should all be given a pink slip by the President of their colleges if they cannot publically admit to the truth about Lewis 6 Structure, and should not pollute the minds of our young students any further.

Post by earle
--- quoting Wikipedia on octet rule ---
History
Newlands' law of octaves
In 1864, the English chemist John Newlands classified the sixty-two known elements into eight groups, based on their physical properties.
In the late 19th century, it was known that coordination compounds (formerly called “molecular compounds”) were formed by the combination of atoms or molecules in such a manner that the valencies of the atoms involved apparently became satisfied. In 1893, Alfred Werner showed that the number of atoms or groups associated with a central atom (the “coordination number”) is often 4 or 6; other coordination numbers up to a maximum of 8 were known, but less frequent.[8] In 1904, Richard Abegg was one of the first to extend the concept of coordination number to a concept of valence in which he distinguished atoms as electron donors or acceptors, leading to positive and negative valence states that greatly resemble the modern concept of oxidation states. Abegg noted that the difference between the maximum positive and negative valences of an element under his model is frequently eight. In 1916, Gilbert N. Lewis referred to this insight as Abegg's rule and used it to help formulate his cubical atom model and the "rule of eight", which began to distinguish between valence and valence electrons. In 1919, Irving Langmuir refined these concepts further and renamed them the "cubical octet atom" and "octet theory". The "octet theory" evolved into what is now known as the "octet rule".
During the formation of a chemical bond, atoms combine together by gaining, losing or sharing electrons in such a way that they acquire nearest noble gas configuration.
Explanation in quantum theory
The quantum theory of the atom explains the eight electrons as a closed shell with an s2p6 electron configuration. A closed-shell configuration is one in which low-lying energy levels are full and higher energy levels are empty. For example, the neon atom ground state has a full n = 2 shell (2s2 2p6) and an empty n = 3 shell. According to the octet rule, the atoms immediately before and after neon in the periodic table (i.e. C, N, O, F, Na, Mg and Al), tend to attain a similar configuration by gaining, losing, or sharing electrons.
The argon atom has an analogous 3s2 3p6 configuration. There is also an empty 3d level, but it is at considerably higher energy than 3s and 3p (unlike in the hydrogen atom), so that 3s2 3p6 is still considered a closed shell for chemical purposes. The atoms immediately before and after argon tend to attain this configuration in compounds. There are, however, some hypervalent molecules in which the 3d level may play a part in the bonding, although this is controversial (see below).
For helium there is no 1p level according to the quantum theory, so that 1s2 is a closed shell with no p electrons. The atoms before and after helium (H and Li) follow a duet rule and tend to have the same 1s2 configuration as helium.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---

Alright, I think I can swing a fabulous explanation out of this. Chemistry needs a 6 in Lewis Structure not a 8. And the 6 comes from that of a cube or box can only have 6 faces, and we consider each face as a Energy Arm of Lewis Arm Structure.
Not a 8 in Lewis Structure for it it were 8 then O2 would have the highest bond dissociation, instead CO and N2.

And where the 8 comes from is what AP needs to equilibrate muon angular momentum to proton angular momentum. The muon is 105MeV while proton is 840MeV, clearly 8muons = 1proton doing the Faraday law. And as the muon thrusts through the 8 ringed proton torus, each of those 8 rings in turn produce a Dirac magnetic monopole, mostly of 1 or 2 eV in energy. This production is what the Chemists from Newlands to Werner to Abegg to Lewis to Langmuir were characterizing. The octet rule is not about the 0.5MeV particle but about the proton and the muon inside the proton. So that as each muon makes 1 full circle around the proton torus, it manufactures 1 monopole per proton ring. There are 8 rings. This is the 8 that Chemists and Physicists are seen in the octet rule, the production of a 1 or 2 eV magnetic monople per full circle of the muon inside its proton.

Bonding of two atoms such as C to O to form CO are the 6 faces, so that O atom has 4 faces to share and C has 2 faces to share. While N has 3 faces to share and so N2 is 3+3=6. The octet rule becomes the sextet rule. Molecules want to be 6 faces as a cube or box.

However, as the muon inside every proton of the atom, moves in a full circle, it passes 8 rings of the proton and each ring it passes creates new electricity of mostly 1 or 2 eV of energy that is sent to a nearby neutron as a capacitor or emitted from the atom as heat or light energy ( starshine).

In this view we can easily see how chemists and physicists mistakenly attributed 8 to bonding when the 8 comes from the muon inside all protons making a full circuit around the proton. And easily see that the focus of how many faces a cube or box is-- is always 6.

But another lesson to learn is that the speed unit is meter/sec^2 and the reverse of that meters^2/second as angular momentum. So we want to know how fast the muon is traveling around inside the proton torus. Is it nearly the speed of light 3.16*10^8 meters/sec. The inverse of that speed is 3.16*10^-9. And if we consider the proton stationary compared to muon for that is how the Faraday law works-- one is relatively stationary. Then we get a nice, nice equalibration of proton 840MeV * 1meters^2/sec = 105MeV* (8meters^2/sec) . So that would be a slow moving muon, not a muon moving at near the speed of light. And the finest way of confirming that idea of a slow moving muon in proton is the Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden gold leaf experiment. Where the conclusion is that the alpha particle does not hit a dense nucleus but a slow moving conglomeration of gold muons. If the muons moved at nearly the speed of light, the amount of direct bounce back recoil would not be rare but be a large number. If the amount of bounce back alpha particles is rare, is a direct correlation to speed of muons inside gold protons. Gold protons would form large toruses.

I hope and I think my tussle fight with "is it 6" or "is it 8" will soon be over with.

AP
King of Science, especially Physics
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
1:25 AM (yesterday)



to
I am going to use this material in updating my 62nd published book. While examining how to make equal the angular momentum of proton to muon, I see I simply need a speed of a factor of 8 to make that equality. This allows me to simplify the concept of angular momentum so much further simplified. Simplify angular momentum as a speed of area or energy. Normal usual speed is distance/time while angular momentum is energy/time. So in speed and its derivative acceleration we have m/s then m/s^2, but in angular momentum we have m^2/s.

So actually acceleration is more complicated than even is that of angular momentum. For acceleration is a second derivative, but angular momentum is seen as a speed, not of distance but of energy.

Elementary Angular-Momentum with Force of Gravity// Angular-Momentum equals Electric Field// Physics series for High School, Book 8
by Archimedes Plutonium

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

1) Angular Momentum is one of the most difficult concepts of physics.

2) Strange motion of Uranus and its satellites.

3) UNITS of PHYSICS

4) Linear Momentum

5) Angular Momentum

6) Principle that Angular Momentum is represented by an ellipse.

7) Principle of Gravity

8) Return and Review of the Moons (satellites) of Uranus.

9) Quantum Duality that is Electricity to Magnetism, and that is Angular Momentum with Force of Gravity.

10) Angular-Momentum equals Electric-Field.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
3:46 PM (22 minutes ago)



to
No-one in the 20th century physics understood what Angular Momentum was. Not even AP who was borne 1950, not until about 2017 and thereafter did a single person in physics start to wake up about angular momentum and to start to get it correct. And even as I write this in 2021, there are still shadowy spots of "what is angular momentum". It is an extremely extremely difficult concept for humans to grapple with, for it is not just a physical notion of speed of energy, but a notion of a force like gravity or like electric field. And there again, no-one in the 20th century actually had a handle on electric field. Oh, yes, they all could understand magnetic field, that is the easy one as we see the Lines of Force, but the electric field was so so difficult a notion or common experience to relate to.

And the 20th century had great talent of physicists with incredible math skills of Planck and Rutherford and Bohr and Pauli and Fermi and Dirac and Feynman and John Bell, enormous talent, but not a one of them aware of "what is angular momentum". Because to be aware of Angular Momentum, you would be aware that it is impossible to have the electron of atoms at 0.5MeV flying around a dense nucleus at nearly the speed of light and still stay together as a atom, impossible. So if anyone, anyone at all thinks they know what angular momentum is, would know that the real proton of hydrogen atom is 840MeV as a torus of 8 rings, each ring being 105MeV as a torus ring and trapped inside that torus is the true electron of atoms as the muon of 105MeV, and performing a job, a task, a function of being a bar magnet muon to the proton's being a Faraday coil and producing electricity everytime the muon goes round and round inside the proton torus. It was impossible in the 20th century to know what Angular Momentum was, yet have a Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, just crazily impossible. Either you held the idiotic electron at 0.5MeV flying around a proton at 938MeV at close to speed of light, never constrained by the proton, or, as when you trap a muon inside a 840MeV proton torus.

Not until starting 2017, could AP begin to find out what Angular Momentum truly is, for you can never know angular momentum in a physics world where idiots think that a proton and neutron and electron have no job, no task, no function but just sitting around lazily like some tourists on a beach sipping lemonade in a nucleus or a 0.5MeV particle flying around outside the nucleus at close to speed of light.

Speed in physics is truly distance/time or meters/second and when we take the derivative of speed we get acceleration as a=m/s^2. The rate of change of speed is acceleration. But now, what if we turned acceleration around to be m^2/second, we square the distance and leave the seconds time alone? Well, we get a parameter that is the heart of Angular Momentum as meters^2 / seconds.

No-one in the 20th century ever really understood what m^2/s was. They all said it was something going around in circles. The all said it was area divided by time, but never comprehended it in a physical meaning.

What is m^2/s and that is answered by saying meter^2/second is a speed, a velocity, but not the usual speed and velocity of distance/time. For m^2/s is a speed of energy. Meters^2 is a area and if you know physics, area is energy and so is volume is energy. Area is energy and so we can replace meter^2/second replace that with Energy/second.

That is what made angular momentum one of the most difficult concepts in all of physics. Angular Momentum is a speed of energy. But energy that is electricity and magnetism, so that compounds the difficulty.

Angular momentum is the Electric Field of physics. And is main component of the force of gravity. Angular momentum is the solar rays turned into circular Lines of Force that penetrate through and out of the solid Earth giving it both a push in its orbit and a pull on Earth to make it orbit around the Sun. Angular Momentum as Electric field is gravity.

earle

2021-03-17 05:01:09 UTC

Permalink

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
No what Fetter, Lipa, Little, Osheroff, Ritson, Schwettman, Turneaure, Wagoner, Yearian, Drell, Tessier-Lavigne need is a pink slip of physics failures.

*
AP: So your answer is you do not know about the earth's electrostatic field. Is that right?

Hint: it averages about 100 volts/meter.

Your claim to fame is making long lists of professionals: physicists and mathematicians, any one of whom knows a thousand times more about physics and mathematics that you will ever learn.

Why? Because you are incapable of learning.

earle
*

Archimedes Plutonium

2021-03-16 05:46:52 UTC

Permalink

Pink slip Mason Yearian, Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Stanley Wojcicki for these clowns are so dumb in physics that supplied with the information that CO and N2 have the highest bond dissociation energy, to know that means Lewis Structure is 6 not 8. This is very important because clowns of physics such as Stanford Univ hold back the research of looking for the isomers of CO2 when Lewis Structure is truly 6, not 8.

AP writes: Earle, you expect Stanford Univ nitwits to reason about Lenard effect when those very same nitwits of physics cannot even "assemble the logical reasoning that since CO and N2 have the highest bond dissociation energy" yet Stanford nitwits of physics teaching Lewis 8 Structure." No what Fetter, Lipa, Little, Osheroff, Ritson, Schwettman, Turneaure, Wagoner, Yearian, Drell, Tessier-Lavigne need is a pink slip of physics failures.

President: Marc Tessier-Lavigne (neuroscience)
Provost: Persis Drell (physics)

Stanford Univ physics dept.

Mason Yearian, Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Stanley Wojcicki

cannot admit to errors of physics (1 angular momentum proves real proton is 840MeV, real electron is muon (2 Lewis 6 Structure is true, not Lewis 8. College presidents do pink slips
58,677 views from Palo Alto

1-Time to remove Physics professors from their teaching post if they cannot admit to errors of physics (1 angular momentum proves real proton is 840MeV, real electron is muon (2 Lewis 6 Structure is true, not Lewis 8. College presidents do pink slips

62nd published book

Elementary Angular-Momentum with Force of Gravity// Angular-Momentum equals Electric Field// Physics series for High School, Book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Angular-Momentum is tough physics. So tough that no physicist of the 20th century knew what it truly was. And believe you me, there were some great mathematical physicists such as Dirac and Feynman and Bohr and Pauli. The reason it was tough, for it had a missing term in it, electric current. This book is not going to go into depth and detail of Angular Momentum or Gravity, but only to get the student a comfortable awareness of what angular-momentum and gravity is, and how it works. After reading this small book and, later, if you want depth and detail of Angular Momentum and Gravity, please see AP's textbook of " Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3, 2019, Kindle Edition, by Archimedes Plutonium.

The mathematics involved in Angular-Momentum and Gravity is too hard for High School, so hard, that it should be spared of all mathematics, and just a geometry description should be given to High School. And only at the end of Freshperson Physics in College should the mathematics of Angular Momentum and Gravity be given in College 1st year Physics. Spared so that the student is in synch with AP's Freshperson Calculus text which the AP-EM equations are at the end of that textbook. In synch reading of 1st year college calculus and 1st year college physics, do we reach a synchronous moment of education teaching to handle the math of Angular-Momentum and Gravity. So in this text, I will speak about the geometry of Angular Momentum and the geometry of Gravity and that is easy to understand. I am not going to go into any mathematical calculations nor the equations of electricity and magnetism that governs Angular Momentum and Gravity. Only a geometry understanding of Angular-Momentum and Gravity.

Cover picture is the planet Uranus with several of its satellites. It is Uranus that proves to us what angular-momentum and gravity truly are, and teaches us what gravity truly is-- it is electricity and magnetism.
Length: 16 pages

Product details
• File Size : 959 KB
• ASIN : B07XT4SP6N
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 16 pages
• Publication Date : September 11, 2019
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Simultaneous Device Usage : Unlimited
• Language: : English
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #171,127 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #2 in 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #12 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #21 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)

2nd published book

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

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

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

Length: 1150 pages

Product details
• File Size : 2167 KB
• ASIN : B07PLVMMSZ
• Publication Date : March 11, 2019
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 1150 pages
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,212 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#181 in General Chemistry & Reference
#1324 in General Chemistry
#1656 in Physics (Kindle Store)
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 2:47:24 PM (yesterday)



to
Units for acceleration are A = meters/sec^2

In Angular Momentum we turn that around to be meters^2/sec. We square the meters and leave the seconds alone.

So, well Angular Momentum is the driving force behind all of Quantum Mechanics for its units are angular momentum and that should be of no surprise to any one in physics who knows the primal axiom of physics. All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.

Both electricity and magnetism are closed look circuits, and that means a math-form of x^2/A^2 where x is the variable and A is the constant so in effect the angular momentum is a math of closed loop circuitry.

So let us just see why the 0.5MeV particle cannot be the electron of atoms and why the muon stuck and trapped inside a 840MeV proton torus must be the true electron of atoms.

For proton we have 840MeV *( meters^2/second)

For muon we have 105MeV * (meters^2/second)

For Dirac magnetic monopole mistaken as the electron we have 0.5MeV * (meters^2/second)

What I am going to demonstrate with this math is not only is the Rutherford-Bohr Model of atom a charlatan fraud for it is impossible given the above math. But that the very concept of Angular Momentum that all of Quantum Mechanics is based upon is a error filled fraud.

As for the second test of whether a Physics professor should stay or be fired out of physics is just a simple test of logic. For it is well known that the CO and N2 molecules have the highest dissociation energy in chemistry. If Lewis 6 Structure is true, then CO and N2 do indeed have the highest dissociation bond energy as we place 6 Lewis Arms in a hand held model. But if Lewis 8 Structure were the truth then we must have O2 has a higher dissociation energy than is CO or N2. Simple logic, but every physics and chemistry professor around the globe espouses and teaches Lewis 8 Structure. They should all be given a pink slip by the President of their colleges if they cannot publically admit to the truth about Lewis 6 Structure, and should not pollute the minds of our young students any further.

AP
King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 14, 2021, 3:17:12 PM (yesterday)



to

Michael Moroney

2021-03-16 18:14:36 UTC

Permalink

🐸 of Math and 🐢 of Physics Archimedes "Meckling's Village Idiot"

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Pink slip Mason Yearian, Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman,

I definitely sense an autism meltdown from Plutonium. Not only are his
usual delusions that all those professors are wrong and should be fired
getting stronger, he has a new delusion I am "universally" disliked when
it is just he who hates me for pointing out all his mistakes.

Poor Plutonium, he can't tell the difference between his imagination and
reality...

Archimedes Plutonium

2021-03-16 20:02:07 UTC

Permalink

Pink slip Brian Conrad, Brian Conrey, Amir Dembo, Persi Diaconis, Yakov Eliashberg, Robert Finn, Jacob Fox, Laura Fredrickson, Søren Galatius, George Schaeffer, Or Hershkovits, David Hoffman, Eleny Ionel, Renata Kallosh, Yitzhak Katznelson, Vladimir Kazeev, Michael Kemeny

No-one in Stanford math or physics can acknowledge oval is slant cut in cone, not ellipse; no-one can do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- totally no use to any math education-- give them a pink slip

Time to remove math professors from their teaching posts in math if they cannot teach the truth about oval is the slant cut in single cone and provide a Geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

Time to remove physics professors who cannot understand the most simple logic-- CO and N2 have highest bond dissociation energy, therefore, yes, therefore Lewis Structure must be based on 6, not 8. Plus, no-one in physics at UCLA understands Angular Momentum for if they did, would know real proton is 840MeV with real electron is muon trapped inside proton doing the Faraday law, the 0.5MeV particle was never the electron but rather instead was the Dirac Magnetic Monopole of physics.

Pink slip them all in physics and math at UCLA as a gaggle of ignorants in science.
1,589, 621 views

I suppose this is the job of the president of a College or University, the removal of a math professor who cannot teach the truth of math, specifically.

1) Provide a Geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

2) Acknowledge in writing that the slant cut of single cone, not a parabola, and not a hyperbola is in fact a oval, never an ellipse.

I suppose it is the duty of a President of College or University to remove a math professor who cannot tell true math from wrong and fake math.

11th published book

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 38 pages

Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1235 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 38 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)

68th published book

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)

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 cone and a cylinder is a slant cut not a cut parallel to the base of the figures.

Length: 41 pages

Product details
File Size: 822 KB
Print Length: 41 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: November 21, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B081TWQ1G6
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray: Not Enabled
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

None can even do the simple experiment -- lid inside a paper cone at slant is a oval, never ellipse, and so poor in calculus, none ever thought you need a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for they only have their bozo limit analysis.

Stanford University, math dept.

Gregory Brumfiel, Daniel Bump, Emmanuel Candès, Gunnar Carlsson, Moses Charikar, Sourav Chatterjee, Tom Church, Ralph Cohen, Brian Conrad, Brian Conrey, Amir Dembo, Persi Diaconis, Yakov Eliashberg, Robert Finn, Jacob Fox, Laura Fredrickson, Søren Galatius, George Schaeffer, Or Hershkovits, David Hoffman, Eleny Ionel, Renata Kallosh, Yitzhak Katznelson, Vladimir Kazeev, Michael Kemeny, Steven Kerckhoff, Susie Kimport, Jun Li, Tai-Ping Liu, Mark Lucianovic, Jonathan Luk, Frederick Manners, Rafe Mazzeo, James R. Milgram, Maryam Mirzakhani, Stefan Mueller, Christopher Ohrt, Donald Ornstein, George Papanicolaou, Lenya Ryzhik, Richard Schoen, Leon Simon, Rick Sommer, Kannan Soundararajan, Tadashi Tokieda, Cheng-Chiang Tsai, Ravi Vakil, András Vasy, Akshay Venkatesh, Jan Vondrák, Brian White, Wojciech Wieczorek, Jennifer Wilson, Alex Wright, Lexing Ying, Xuwen Zhu

President: Marc Tessier-Lavigne (neuroscience)
Provost: Persis Drell (physics)

Post by Michael Moroney
he can't tell the difference between his imagination and
reality...

Stanford physics dept.

Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Stanley Wojcicki, Mason Yearian

Archimedes Plutonium

2023-01-04 11:20:23 UTC

Permalink

Han Duck-soo, Yoon Suk-yeol Please free your Moon bears.
Boycott Samsung & Hyundai until they free their moon bears.
South Korea free your tortured Moon bears

Save moon-bears, sure no-one cares to save spam from FBI, CIA, Mi6, police drag net garbage that floods sci.math and sci.physics everyday. I have kindly asked President Biden to kindly remove this drag net spam from all of sci.math and sci.physics and leave them as __spam free zones__.

FBI, CIA, police drag net, Russian disinformation b.s. spam spam spam oil masterpiece painting of freeing Moon Bears.
No wonder sci.math, sci.physics only survived 1993-1997, 4 brief years, then the b.s. and drag net spam took over

\\ ("`****/").
\\ `0_ 0 ) `-.
\\ (_&_.)' ._ )
\\ `--' / /
\\ ==1(li)===========
\\
\\
two caged Moon Bears caged all their life and bile extracted

\\ ("`****//'").
\\ `0_ 0 ) `-.
\\ (_&_.)' ._ )
\\ `--' / /
\\ ==1(li)===========
\\
\\


Short History of Usenet, sci.physics, sci.math from 1993-2020, and its 90% decline// Sociology series, book 9 Kindle Edition

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 6Jan2022. This is AP's 129th published book on science.

Preface: This book started out as a book on "stalking" but when Google revised its Google Newsgroup platform, with altogether different formatting, this book morphed into becoming a "90% demise of Usenet and sci.physics and sci.math in particular". In one of my posts on this book I said the title was going to change often until I actually write the book. And that is what happened. For in late December 2021, It was revealed to me that a persistent stalker under the name Michael Moroney (who stated in one of his stalking posts to be kibo, as in Kibo Parry) was posting from a CIA line in 1997. So that completes this history of Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics, as the demise is nearly all due to the fact that the constant and persistent police drag net spam chased most everyone else away, and most importantly the dot-edu address posters out of sci.math and sci.physics. Educated people just do not want to bother discussing physics or math while everywhere around is criss-crossed with vulgar police drag net spam.

Cover Picture: Is the newsgroup Plutonium-Atom-Universe that is fully controlled by the King of Science AP, Archimedes Plutonium. Every post in that newsgroup is about pure science, no ad hominem. And that is what the sci.physics and sci.math should be. Discussions on pure science, nothing else, and especially no ad hominem, no stalking, no spam, no off-topic junk, no solution manual selling, no drug selling, no police drag-net spam.

Product details
• Publication Date : August 31, 2020
• ASIN : B08H5B71M4
• File Size : 1045 KB
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print Length : 78 pages
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Language: : English
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

#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

#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)

#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

#1-4, 105th published book

Atom Geometry is Torus Geometry // Atom Totality series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Since all atoms are doing the Faraday Law inside them, of their thrusting muon into a proton coil in the shape of a geometry torus, then the torus is the geometry of each and every atom. But then we must explain the neutrons since the muon and proton are doing Faraday's Law, then the neutron needs to be explained in terms of this proton torus with muon inside, all three shaped as rings. The muon is a single ring and each proton is 8 rings. The neutron is shaped like a plate and is solid not hollow. The explanation of a neutron is that of a capacitor storing what the proton-muon rings produce in electricity. Where would the neutron parallel plates be located? I argue in this text that the neutron plates when fully grown from 1 eV until 945MeV are like two parallel plate capacitors where each neutron is part of one plate, like two pieces of bread with the proton-muon torus being a hamburger patty.

Cover Picture: I assembled two atoms in this picture where the proton torus with a band of muons inside traveling around and around the proton torus producing electricity. And the pie-plates represent neutrons as parallel-plate capacitors.
Length: 39 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : March 24, 2020
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• ASIN : B086BGSNXN
• Print Length : 39 pages
• File Size : 935 KB
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,656,820 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#6413 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
#315 in One-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
#4953 in Physics (Kindle Store)
 

#1-5, 112th published book

New Perspective on Psi^2 in the Schrodinger Equation in a Atom Totality Universe// Atom Totality series, book 5
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

I first heard of the Schrodinger equation in college chemistry class. We never actually did any problem solving with the equation, and we were only told about it. Then taking physics my next year in college and after I bought the Feynman Lectures on Physics, just for fun for side reading, three volume set did I learn what this Schrodinger equation and the Psi^2 wavefunction was about. I am not going to teach the mathematics of the Schrodinger equation and the math calculations of the Psi or Psi^2 in this book, but leave that up to the reader or student to do that from Feynman's Lectures on Physics. The purpose of this book is to give a new and different interpretation of what Psi^2 is, what Psi^2 means. Correct interpretation of physics experiments and observations turns out to be one of the most difficult tasks in all of physics.

Cover Picture: a photograph taken of me in 1993, after the discovery of Plutonium Atom Totality, and I was 43 years old then, on a wintery hill of New Hampshire. It is nice that Feynman wrote a physics textbook series, for I am very much benefitting from his wisdom. If he had not done that, getting organized in physics by writing textbooks, I would not be writing this book. And I would not have discovered the true meaning of the Fine Structure Constant, for it was Feynman who showed us that FSC is really 0.0854, not that of 0.0072. All because 0.0854 is Psi, and Psi^2 is 0.0072.
Length: 20 pages

Product details
• ASIN : B0875SVDC7
• Publication date : April 15, 2020
• Language: : English
• File size : 1134 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 20 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #240,066 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #65 in General Chemistry & Reference
◦ #481 in Physics (Kindle Store)

#1-6, 135th published book

QED in Atom Totality theory where proton is a 8 ring torus and electron = muon inside proton doing Faraday Law// Atom Totality series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)  
Since the real true electron of atoms is the muon and is a one ring bar magnet thrusting through the 8 ring torus of a proton, we need a whole entire new model of the hydrogen atom. Because the Bohr model with the 0.5MeV particle jumping orbitals as the explanation of Spectral Lines is all wrong. In this vacuum of explaining spectral line physics, comes the AP Model which simply states that the hydrogen atom creates Spectral lines because at any one instant of time 4 of the 8 proton rings is "in view" and the electricity coming from those 4 view rings creates spectral line physics.

Cover Picture: Is a imitation of the 8 ring proton torus, with my fingers holding on the proton ring that has the muon ring perpendicular and in the equatorial plane of the proton rings, thrusting through. This muon ring is the same size as the 8 proton rings making 9 x 105MeV = 945MeV of energy. The muon ring has to be perpendicular and lie on the equator of the proton torus. Surrounding the proton-torus would be neutrons as skin or coating cover and act as capacitors in storing the electricity produced by the proton+muon.

Product details
• ASIN : B08K47K5BB
• Publication date : September 25, 2020
• Language : English
• File size : 587 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 25 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #291,001 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #13 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #52 in General Chemistry & Reference
◦ #334 in General Chemistry

#1-7, 138th published book
The true NUCLEUS of Atoms are inner toruses moving around in circles of a larger outer torus// Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden Experiment revisited // Atom Totality Series, book 7 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The geometry of Atoms of the Table of Chemical Elements is torus geometry. We know this to be true for the torus geometry forms the maximum electricity production when using the Faraday Law. We see this in Old Physics with their tokamak toruses attempting to make fusion, by accelerating particles of the highest possible acceleration for the torus is that geometry. But the torus is the geometry not only of maximum acceleration but of maximum electrical generation by having a speeding bar magnet go around and around inside a torus== the Faraday law, where the torus rings are the copper closed wire loop. The protons of atoms are 8 loops of rings in a torus geometry, and the electron of atoms is the muon as bar magnet, almost the same size as the proton loops but small enough to fit inside proton loops. It is torus geometry that we investigate the geometry of all atoms.
Length: 41 pages

Product details
• Publication Date : October 9, 2020
• File Size : 828 KB
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print Length : 41 pages
• ASIN : B08KZT5TCD
• Language: : English
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Lending : Enabled

#1-8, 1st published book

Atom Totality Universe, 8th edition, 2017// A history log book: Atom Totality Series book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision 7Apr2021. This was AP's first published science book.

Advisory: This is a difficult book to read and is AP's research log book of the Atom Totality in 2016-2017. I want to keep it for its history value. AP advises all readers wanting to know the Plutonium Atom Totality theory to go to the 9th edition that is the latest up to date account of this theory. The reason AP wants to keep the 8th edition is because of Historical Value, for in this book, while writing it, caused the discovery of the real electron is the muon of atoms. The real proton of atoms is 840MeV and not the 938MeV that most books claim. The particle discovered by JJ Thomson in 1897 thinking he discovered the electron of atoms was actually the Dirac magnetic monopole at 0.5MeV. This discovery changes every, every science that uses atoms and electricity and magnetism, in other words, every science.

Foreward:
I wrote the 8th edition of Atom Totality and near the end of writing it in 2017, I had my second greatest physics discovery. I learned the real electron of atoms was the muon at 105MeV and not the tiny 0.5MeV particle that J.J.Thomson found in 1897. So I desperately tried to include that discovery in my 8th edition and it is quite plain to see for I tried to write paragraphs after each chapter saying as much. I knew in 2017, that it was a great discovery, changing all the hard sciences, and reframing and restructuring all the hard sciences.
Length: 632 pages

Product details
File Size: 1132 KB
Print Length: 632 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLP9NDR
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #578,229 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
                #1610 in Physics (Kindle Store)
                #8526 in Physics (Books)
                #18851 in Biological Sciences (Books)

#1-9, 163rd published book
Stellar System Evolution for Advanced Intelligent Life //Atom Totality science Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition

Preface: This book explores the question of why the Sun has a planet with abundant life that evolved over 3.7 billion years ago into the advanced intelligent life of humans, yet the Sun has gone Red Giant initiation phase that threatens to destroy all life on Earth in the next few thousand years. The question of why even bother having advanced intelligent life if the home star quickly destroys that life and the planet it resides upon? Why bother with advanced intelligent life if it is put under such enormous stress and strain and energy to move to a distant satellite of Europa and Ganymede. Surely the Cosmic design must tell us why this is our fate.
Cover Picture: is my iphone photograph of Europa.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09NQ65H9F
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 15, 2021
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 999 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 60 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

#1-10, 161st published book

PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 137 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface:
A Physicsopedia is a book of the overall assessment and evaluation of the state of the art of Physics. It is like a report card. It is a total view of the science and a judgement of the science, both of the past, present and the direction forward into the future. Its greatest use is to alert readers and people in science of what is wrong with their subject, and as a ancillary use, to alert students what to avoid in college as a waste of time.
It is not in alphabetical order but mostly, rather, has a ordering of what is most important at the start and only at the very very end. For there is no index.
Physics is the most important hard science for every other science is a specialized part of physics. And Old Physics has three key huge mistakes that this book addresses. The true theory of the Universe is the Atom Totality, not the Big Bang which is a ridiculous theory. The true electron of atoms is not the particle of 0.5MeV which turns out to be Dirac's magnetic monopole, while the true real electron of atoms is the muon of 105MeV which is stuck inside a proton torus of 8 rings of 840MeV. This causes another huge mistake, for a mistake in physics usually has a cascade effect of more and more mistakes. When we take the true electron of atoms is the muon, means the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but from that muon thrusting through the proton torus in a Faraday law of electricity and magnetism producing electrical energy. So our Sun shines from the Faraday law, not fusion. And this implies the Sun has gone into Red Giant phase with a solar radiation increase of 0.005% yearly increase. That implies all life on Earth is in danger of going extinct as the Sun becomes more and more Red Giant, and unless humanity moves out to Europa, humanity goes extinct.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09N18QPP1
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 3, 2021
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1139 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 82 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

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

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

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

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

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-15 03:21:16 UTC

Permalink

The Delicious Rump Man- Robert Wagoner,Chi-Chung Kao,Mason Yearian, says Earle Jones while Kibo says little stinker. And AP says-- he has been tolerant of hate spew from Jones for 25 years, Kibo of 30 years, but no longer. And if sci.physics can kick out the insane shithead Jones, then sci.math should be able to do the same. And kick out the insane paid for Stalker Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, even if it takes firing NSF Dr. Panchanathan.

Earle's profile photo
Earle
unread,
Archimedes Plutonium and Ohm's Law
* It is my opinion that Archimedes Plutonium does not know Ohm's Law. Earle Jones (BS Electricalo
11:22 PM June 12, 2023


"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.

1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.

5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

Starting 2009 when I was working on Infinity Borderline, I had an adventure of sorts of seeing that the infinity borderline was able to give all the angles of regular polyhedra, if not, it is not a infinity [...]

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

The arsewipe of Stanford Univ. is so demented he fails to comprehend what a author wrote.
AP says the borderline of finite numbers from infinite numbers is 1*10^604, where that is the largest Finite Number, and numbers beyond are Infinite Numbers.
When mathematicians fail to define the borderline, they fail to define what is Finite or what is Infinite, and there is only one concept when you fail to define the borderline.
A sickfuck hate monger like Earle Jones, and perhaps the majority at Stanford Univ are as sickfuck as Earle Jones is a sickfuck, for AP has tolerated this arsewipe Jones for 25 years, and if sci,physics can kick Jones out, I see no reason why sci.math has him lingering and pestering and spewing hatred.



MR. METICULOUS PINHEAD John Lipa,David Ritson,Persis Drell,Stanford Univ says Earle Jones the 25 year nonstop hate spewing arsewipe of sci.math and sci.physics. Earle, did sci.physics kick you out knowing you were just a hatemonger with nothing of science to offer?? Now I am asking for sci.math to kick you out as a hate spewing jackarse.

It is easy to see that inability to comprehend what other people say is a sign of dementia, and Earle Jones is full of dementia. But we cannot then say that Dr. Hau's inability to turn the light switch off in slow light experiments and watch all the light disappear at the same time-- slow and normal light speed. We cannot say that is lack of comprehension, thus dementia.
Earle Jones shows us what insanity is all about-- never ending hate spew-- 25 years of raw hatred with no end in sight. So, well, let this thread be on top of sci.math leader board until some grown-up at Stanford Uni carts the demented hate mongering shithead to a clinic.
We can say Dr. Hau is stubborn and non complying in science. While Earle Jones is a demented sod.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

Remember, the letters in "Archimedes Plutonium"
can be re-arranged to spell
"The Delicious Rump Man"
"I Pound His Male Rectum"
"Penis Could Mature Him"
"Old-Time U.S. Urine Champ"
and many other delightful phrases

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)

SLAC: Chi-Chung Kao
Stanford University, math dept.
Gregory Brumfiel, Daniel Bump, Emmanuel Candès, Gunnar Carlsson, Moses Charikar, Sourav Chatterjee, Tom Church, Ralph Cohen, Brian Conrad, Brian Conrey, Amir Dembo, Persi Diaconis, Yakov Eliashberg, Robert Finn, Jacob Fox, Laura Fredrickson, Søren Galatius, George Schaeffer, Or Hershkovits, David Hoffman, Eleny Ionel, Renata Kallosh, Yitzhak Katznelson, Vladimir Kazeev, Michael Kemeny, Steven Kerckhoff, Susie Kimport, Jun Li, Tai-Ping Liu, Mark Lucianovic, Jonathan Luk, Frederick Manners, Rafe Mazzeo, James R. Milgram, Maryam Mirzakhani, Stefan Mueller, Christopher Ohrt, Donald Ornstein, George Papanicolaou, Lenya Ryzhik, Richard Schoen, Leon Simon, Rick Sommer, Kannan Soundararajan, Tadashi Tokieda, Cheng-Chiang Tsai, Ravi Vakil, András Vasy, Akshay Venkatesh, Jan Vondrák, Brian White, Wojciech Wieczorek, Jennifer Wilson, Alex Wright, Lexing Ying, Xuwen Zhu
SLAC: Chi-Chung Kao



President: Marc Tessier-Lavigne (neuroscience)
Provost: Persis Drell (physics)
Stanford physics dept.
Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, H. Alan Schwettman, John Turneaure, Robert Wagoner, Mason Yearian

Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-15 16:03:12 UTC

Permalink

The Delicious Rump Man- Robert Wagoner,Chi-Chung Kao,Mason Yearian, says Earle Jones while Kibo says little stinker. And AP says-- he has been tolerant of hate spew from Jones for 25 years, Kibo of 30 years, but no longer. And if sci.physics can kick out the insane shithead Jones, then sci.math should be able to do the same. And kick out the insane paid for Stalker Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, even if it takes firing NSF Dr. Panchanathan.

What is a numbskull of physics who never studied math doing in sci.math?? Earle was kicked out of sci.physics, what the hell is he doing pestering and harassing people in sci.math, the demented old stalker fool???

Earle's profile photo
Earle
unread,
Archimedes Plutonium and Ohm's Law
* It is my opinion that Archimedes Plutonium does not know Ohm's Law. Earle Jones (BS Electricalo
11:22 PM June 12, 2023


"little stinker"

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



#5-1, My 134th published book

Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.

Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)

#5-2, 45th published

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)

Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.

Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.

This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.

It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.

Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#15 in General Geometry
#223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

#5-3, 55th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.

Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.

The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.

And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.

But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.

Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.

The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 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 ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)

 

#5-4, 56th published book

COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

#1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads

This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
Length: 54 pages

Product details
File Size: 1035 KB
Print Length: 64 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#318 in Calculus (Books)
#48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
 
#5-5, 72nd published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.

Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension.
Length: 105 pages

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)

#5-6, 75th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.

Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.

Length: 175 pages

Product details
ASIN : B0836F1YF6
Publication date : December 26, 2019
Language : English
File size : 741 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 175 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)

#5-7, 89th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020

Last revision was 6Feb2021.
Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.

Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.

Length: 110 pages

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)

#5-8, 90th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020

Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.

Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.

My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.

So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.

Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.

Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry. But I have more to say on this below.
Length: 296 pages

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #13 in General Geometry
◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

#5-9, 221st published book

An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.

My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
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)

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages

#5-10, 160th published book

MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
by Archimedes Plutonium

Preface:
A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.

The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.

The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.

Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.

I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
• Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages

y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-15 17:18:57 UTC

Permalink

2- The Delicious Rump Man- Robert Laughlin, Carl Wieman, Steven Chu, Douglas Osheroff, says Earle Jones while Kibo says little stinker. And AP says-- he has been tolerant of hate spew from Jones for 25 years, Kibo of 30 years, but no longer. And if sci.physics can kick out the insane shithead Jones, then sci.math should be able to do the same. And kick out the insane paid for Stalker Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, even if it takes firing NSF Dr. Panchanathan.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
What is a numbskull of physics who never studied math doing in sci.math?? Earle was kicked out of sci.physics, what the hell is he doing pestering and harassing people in sci.math, the demented old stalker fool???
Earle's profile photo
Earle
unread,
Archimedes Plutonium and Ohm's Law
* It is my opinion that Archimedes Plutonium does not know Ohm's Law. Earle Jones (BS Electricalo
11:22 PM June 12, 2023


"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



#5-1, My 134th published book
Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.
Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)
#5-2, 45th published
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)
Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.
Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.
This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.
It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.
Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.
Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#15 in General Geometry
#223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
#5-3, 55th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.
Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.
The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.
And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.
But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.
Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.
The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 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 ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)
 
#5-4, 56th published book
COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
#1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
Length: 54 pages
Product details
File Size: 1035 KB
Print Length: 64 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#318 in Calculus (Books)
#48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
 
#5-5, 72nd published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.
Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension.
Length: 105 pages
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)
#5-6, 75th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.
Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.
Length: 175 pages
Product details
ASIN : B0836F1YF6
Publication date : December 26, 2019
Language : English
File size : 741 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 175 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)
#5-7, 89th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
Last revision was 6Feb2021.
Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.
Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.
Length: 110 pages
Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)
#5-8, 90th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.
Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.
My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.
So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.
Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.
Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry. But I have more to say on this below.
Length: 296 pages
Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #13 in General Geometry
◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
#5-9, 221st published book
An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.
Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.
My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
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)
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages
#5-10, 160th published book
MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
by Archimedes Plutonium
A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.
The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.
The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.
Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.
I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
• Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages
y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

Volney

2023-06-16 04:48:50 UTC

Permalink

🪰 of Math and 🦟 of Physics Archimedes "Drag Queen of Math" Plutonium

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, even if it

As I said, I was doing a little experiment again by not responding to
StupidPlutonium. StupidPlutonium kept insulting me, perhaps just a
little less. I had to remind StupidPlutonium and actually tell him of
this, so what does he do? He attacks me some more, that's how dumb
StupidPlutonium is.

What's more, StupidPlutonium is even insulting his many superiors more,
like Earle Jones, Dan C., Chris etc.

StupidPlutonium, don't you know that you are right near the bottom of
the totem pole of math and science? Jones, Dan, Chris etc. are WAY above
you. You really shouldn't attack and insult your betters like that!

You aren't at the very bottom, of course. You are above Mitch, yanwick
and perhaps your brother crank Banerjee.

Ghost of Uncle Al, what do you think of StupidPlutonium being so dumb
and stoopid that he can't even learn not to attack myself and everyone
else here?

"I cannot believe how incredibly stupid Archie-Poo is. I mean rock-hard
stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. Surface of Venus
under 80 atmospheres of red hot carbon dioxide and sulfuric acid vapor
dehydrated for 300 million years rock-hard stupid. Stupid so stupid
that it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different
sensorium of stupid. Archie-Poo is trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid.
Stupid so collapsed upon itself that it is within its own Schwarzschild
radius. Black hole stupid. Stupid gotten so dense and massive that no
intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Archie-Poo emits more
stupid/second than our entire galaxy otherwise emits stupid/year.
Quasar stupid. Nothing else in the universe can be this stupid.
Archie-Poo is an oozingly putrescent primordial fragment from the
original Big Bang of Stupid, a pure essence of stupid so uncontaminated
by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that define
maximally extrapolated hypergeometric n-dimensional backgroundless
stupid as we can imagine it. Archie-Poo is Planck stupid, a quantum
foam of stupid, a vacuum decay of stupid, a grand unified theory of
stupid.

Archie-Poo is the epitome of stupidity, the epiphany of stupid, the
apotheosis of stupidity. Archie-poo is stooopid."

Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-16 02:18:55 UTC

Permalink

"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Post by Archimedes Plutonium
#5-1, My 134th published book
Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.
Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)
#5-2, 45th published
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)
Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.
Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.
This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.
It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.
Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.
Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#15 in General Geometry
#223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
#5-3, 55th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.
Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.
The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.
And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.
But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.
Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.
The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 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 ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)
 
#5-4, 56th published book
COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
#1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
Length: 54 pages
Product details
File Size: 1035 KB
Print Length: 64 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#318 in Calculus (Books)
#48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
 
#5-5, 72nd published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.
Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension.
Length: 105 pages
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)
#5-6, 75th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2019
This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.
Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.
Length: 175 pages
Product details
ASIN : B0836F1YF6
Publication date : December 26, 2019
Language : English
File size : 741 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 175 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)
#5-7, 89th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
Last revision was 6Feb2021.
Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.
Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.
Length: 110 pages
Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)
#5-8, 90th published book
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020
Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.
Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.
My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.
So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.
Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.
Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry. But I have more to say on this below.
Length: 296 pages
Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #13 in General Geometry
◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
#5-9, 221st published book
An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.
Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.
My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
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)
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages
#5-10, 160th published book
MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
by Archimedes Plutonium
A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.
The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.
The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.
Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.
I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
• Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages
y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-16 05:13:17 UTC

Permalink

_The Delicious Rump Man- Andras Vasy, Richard Schoen, Leon Simon, Rick Sommer, says Earle Jones while Kibo says little stinker. And AP says-- he has been tolerant of hate spew from Jones for 25 years, Kibo of 30 years, but no longer. And if sci.physics can kick out the insane shithead Jones, then sci.math should be able to do the same. And kick out the insane paid for Stalker Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, even if it takes firing NSF Dr. Panchanathan.



"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-16 15:30:34 UTC

Permalink

I_Pound His Male Rectum- Douglas Osheroff,Robert Laughlin, Carl Wieman, Steven Chu, says Earle Jones while Kibo says little stinker. And AP says-- he has been tolerant of hate spew from Jones for 25 years, Kibo of 30 years, but no longer. And if sci.physics can kick out the insane shithead Jones, then sci.math should be able to do the same. And kick out the insane paid for Stalker Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, even if it takes firing NSF Dr. Panchanathan.



"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-17 05:55:47 UTC

Permalink



"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-17 18:15:12 UTC

Permalink



"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-18 06:48:50 UTC

Permalink



"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-18 23:02:55 UTC

Permalink



"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2023-06-19 08:03:28 UTC

Permalink

"little stinker"

Stanford's Mason Yearian, Harvard's Sheldon Glashow, Peter Higgs, Harry Cliff ever ask the question, which is the atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle which AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole while the real electron is a muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. In fact so stupid is this list of so called physicists that they went through life believing the slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, when in reality it is a Oval of 1 axis of symmetry for the cone has 1 axis of symmetry but ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry. The minds of all these so called physicists are not good enough to be doing physics. In fact, so stupid in science and math are all these people that when told in High School or College that a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse, they believed it, and believe in it to this day without so much as ever questioning the idea that a single cone and oval have just 1 axis of symmetry while ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, and yet many on this list were awarded science prizes. Maybe for ignorance of science but not for truth of science.
1) Too stupid to question if Thomson found Dirac's magnetic monopole and not the electron of atoms.
2) Too stupid to realize that in the Rutherford,Geiger, Marsden Experiment when you have increase in velocity of bounce back alpha particles means head on collision with a larger proton torus, hence, the interior of gold atoms are toruses, no nucleus.
3) Too stupid in logic to understand subatomic particles have jobs and tasks to do, not sit around on beaches sipping lemonade what Old Physics says. The proton is a 8 ring torus with muon as electron inside doing the Faraday law producing new electricity.
4) Too stupid to understand stars and our Sun shine not from fusion but from Faraday law of each and every atom inside that star.
5) think a slant cut in single cone is a ellipse when it is proven to be a Oval, never the ellipse. For the cone and oval have 1 axis of symmetry, while ellipse has 2.
6) think Boole logic is correct with AND truth table being TFFF when it really is TTTF in order to avoid 2 OR 1 =3 with AND as subtraction
7) can never do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and are too ignorant in math to understand that analysis of something is not proving something in their "limit hornswaggle"
8) too stupid in science to ask the question of physics-- is the 1897 Thomson discovery of a 0.5MeV particle actually the Dirac magnetic monopole and that the muon is the true electron of atoms stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law. Showing that Peter Higgs, Sheldon Glashow, Ed Witten, John Baez, Roger Penrose, Arthur B. McDonald are sapheads when it comes to logical thinking in physics with their do nothing proton, do nothing electron.

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

An n-gon goes on for infinity. Its limit is the circle...

*
2 x 10^604; 10^605; 3.14159 x 10^604. I am fairly sure that there are other numbers larger than 10^604, Peerhaps you could discover several more.
earle
*

Why does Stanford Univ continue to let this insane arsewipe Earle Jones defile Stanford Univ??

I am an idiot.

*
Yes, Archy's name is very anagrammable.
My favorite: Mr. Meticulous Pinhead.
earle
*





I was trying to find some kind of intro document or FAQ-like information for newcomers on how to make the most out of this newsgroup.
Earle Jones kirjutas reede

Here is an old (July, 1997) copy of "Psychoceramics: the on-oline
crackpots" by Toby Howard (Department of Computer Science, University
of Manchester.)



Archimedes Plutonium

2024-01-23 05:44:58 UTC

Permalink

Jan Burse, why cannot Dr.Kurt Wuthrich,Dr.Joel Mesot,ETH finish their water electrolysis by actually weighing the mass of hydrogen and compare to oxygen, instead of the stupid silly eyeballing the volume of one compared to volume of other?

AP asks whether the trio Jan Burse, Kibo Parry, Dan Christensen are administering reCAPTcha and thus preventing AP from posting in sci.math and sci.physics as new threads, causing AP to have to post in a old thread.

Volney (CIA) with Jan Burse selling ETH because they cannot do Water Electrolysis properly-- forgetting to actually weigh the mass of hydrogen compared to oxygen, and stop at observing volume. ETH science is so shoddy of logical reasoning.

Re: Olcott & Damon is Dr.Duncan Haldane (phy), Dr.John Kosterlitz (phy), Dr.Michael Levitt (chem) of Cambridge as dunce in Water Electrolysis, never weighing the hydrogen and oxygen as dunce as you Pete Olcott and Richard Damon with your Boole logic
by Mild Shock (Swiss Jan Burse)
Nov 16, 2023, 3:51:20 PM

Re: _Donald Schwendeman, Rensselaer,Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, is the reason you failed to confirm .5MeV was not the atom's electron but Dirac's monopole because you failed science like kibo
by j4n bur53 Apr 25, 2019, 12:08:26 PM

Re: Pres.Biden please examine the resignation of Dr.Panchanathan NSF (Trump appointee) as the root cause of Kibo's "analbuttfuckmanure" stalk 2017, Kibo's necrophilia stalking 2022, Kibo's hatred of Pope, and Kibo's "you need more punishment" stalks.
by ***@gmail.com May 13, 2023, 7:01:55 PM

Volney, who can weigh
Kurt Wuthrich (chem), Dr.Joel Mesot,Charalampos Anastasiou, Niklas Beisert, Adrian Biland, Gianni Blatter, Marcella Carollo, Christian Degen, Leonardo Degiorgi, Gunther Dissertori, Klaus Ensslin, Tilman Esslinger, Jerome Faist, Matthias Gaberdiel, Aude Gehrmann-De Ridder, Vadim Geshkenbein, Christophorus Grab, Michele Graf, Jonathan Home, Roland Horisberger, Sebastian Huber, Thomas Markus Ihn, Atac Imamoglu, Steven Johnson, Ursula Keller, Klaus Kirch, Simon Lilly, Joel Mesot, Renatto Renner, Andre Rubbia, Werner Schmutz, Thomas Schulthess, Manfred Sigrist, Hans-Arno Synal, Matthias Troyer, Andreas Vaterlaus, Rainer Wallny, Andreas Wallraff, Werner Wegscheider, Audrey Zheludev, Oded Zilberberg
the hydrogen and oxygen in Water Electrolysis, for it is unusual that Caltech physics is so shoddy in logical thought as to think of stopping Water Electrolysis by observation of Volume and not weighing the masses.

This is Volney-Kibo Parry Moroney spam (CIA connected drag net spam b.s.), and no matter how much you report it to Google Abuse-- they cannot kick the miscreant out-- I suggest reporting this spam to your Congress-person. Not only do they stalk you for 30 years but destroy the newsgroup they pollute. Just look at sci.chem which is a destroyed newsgroup. The Google Abuse report only hides the miscreant, but the next day-- new fresh b.s.spam is there.

Re: Dan is the Kibo Parry Moroney Volney CIA equivalent for Canada-- using Usenet but destroying newsgroups of science in the process

Volney's failures..Zurich ETH, physics dept
Charalampos Anastasiou, Niklas Beisert, Adrian Biland, Gianni Blatter, Marcella Carollo, Christian Degen, Leonardo Degiorgi,

Jan Burse and Volney, why cannot ETH finish their water electrolysis experiment by weighing the mass of hydrogen and oxygen to prove Water is really H4O not H2O??

They must know the Quartz Crystal Microbalance has been around since 1960s to weigh hydrogen and oxygen in water electrolysis.

Why Volney can they not finish the water electrolysis experiment to weigh the mass of hydrogen and oxygen?? Because they are so sloppy and slipshod in Physics experiment of Water Electrolysis, stopping and ceasing the experiment before weighing the mass of the hydrogen compared to mass of oxygen. Is it that they are stupid silly thinking volume and mass are the same. For AP needs to prove decisively, if Water is really H4O or H2O. And of course, this experiment would destroy the Standard Model-- that post-diction theory of physics that never gave a single prediction in all of its tenure.

Or is it because they cannot admit the truth of math geometry that slant cut of cone is oval, not ellipse for you need the symmetry of slant cut of cylinder to yield a ellipse.

"goonclod failure of logic"

President: Christopher Eisgruber (physics)
Princeton Univ physics dept
Michael Aizenman, Philip Anderson, Robert Austin, Waseem Bakr, Bogdan Bernevig, Ravindra Bhatt, William Bialek, Frank Calaprice, Curtis Callan, Roberto Car, Paul Chaikin, Kenan Diab, Jo Dunkley, Aurelien Fraisse, Cristiano Galbiati, Simone Giombi, Thomas Gregor, David Gross, Edward Groth, Steven Gubser, William Happer, John Hopfield, Andrew Houck, David Huse, Norman Jarosik, William Jones, Andrew Leifer, Elliot Lieb, Daniel Marlow, Peter Meyers, James Olsen, Lyman Page, Alexander Polyakov, Frans Pretorius, Michael Romalis, Joshua Shaevitz, A. Smith, Shivaji Sondhi, Suzanne Staggs, Paul Steinhardt, David Tank, Christopher Tully, Herman Verlinde, Edward Witten, F.Duncan Haldane (physics), Russell Hulse (physics), Joseph Taylor (physics), Dr. David MacMillan (chem), James Peebles (physics), Daniel Tsui (physics)

ETH Zurich
Joel Mesot, Gunther Dissertori
Paul Biran, Marc Burger, Patrick Cheridito, Manfred Einsiedler, Paul Embrechts
Giovanni Felder, Alessio Figalli, Norbert Hungerbuhler, Tom Ilmanen, Horst Knorrer
Emmanuel Kowalski
Urs Lang
Rahul Pandharipande
Richard Pink
Tristan Riviere
Dietmar Salamon
Martin Schweizer
Mete Soner
Michael Struwe
Benjamin Sudakov
Alain Sznitman
Josef Teichmann
Wendelin Werner
Thomas Willwacher

Zurich ETH, physics dept
Charalampos Anastasiou, Niklas Beisert, Adrian Biland, Gianni Blatter, Marcella Carollo, Christian Degen, Leonardo Degiorgi, Gunther Dissertori, Klaus Ensslin, Tilman Esslinger, Jerome Faist, Matthias Gaberdiel, Aude Gehrmann-De Ridder, Vadim Geshkenbein, Christophorus Grab, Michele Graf, Jonathan Home, Roland Horisberger, Sebastian Huber, Thomas Markus Ihn, Atac Imamoglu, Steven Johnson, Ursula Keller, Klaus Kirch, Simon Lilly, Joel Mesot, Renatto Renner, Andre Rubbia, Werner Schmutz, Thomas Schulthess, Manfred Sigrist, Hans-Arno Synal, Matthias Troyer, Andreas Vaterlaus, Rainer Wallny, Andreas Wallraff, Werner Wegscheider,Audrey Zheludev,Oded Zilberberg,
Kurt Wuthrich (chem), Dr.Joel Mesot

University Bern
Christian Leumann
Walter Benjamin
Emil Theodor Kocher
Kurt Wuthrich
Daniel Vassella
Rene Fasel
Mani Matter

AP writes: Looks like it is not going to stop for petty criminal Burse until he ends up in prison. He forges innocent people, and he even tore down AP's Wikipedia page. Now he is posting arbitrary houses for sale. To get at AP. So, really, Burse is a Swiss minded criminal, and someone should stop him before he hurts someone.

Jan Burse continues to defile and demonize AP on Google Search :

Jan Burse defiling and demonizing nonstop for 20 years of AP:

Still there--- Burse's demonization and defiling of AP in a Google Search---

ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM BANNED from. Dartmouth canteen. His wheelchair is too wide, he doesn't pass the entrance. ...Mostowski Collapse's profile photo....

Apparently Kibo realized he was a science failure when he could not even do a proper percentage. But then one has to wonder how much he paid to bribe Rensselaer to graduate from the school in engineering unable to do a percentage properly???? For I certainly would not hire a engineer who cannot even do proper percentage.

------------------

Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Why Volney?? Because they stop short of completing the Water Electrolysis Experiment by only looking at volume, when they are meant to weigh the mass of hydrogen versus oxygen?? Such shoddy minds in experimental physics and chemistry.

Physics minnow

What warning is that Kibo Parry failure of science-- warning that insane persons like Kibo Parry Moroney Volney spends their entire life in a hate-mill, never doing anything in science itself.

Kibo Parry Moroney-Volney blowing his cover with the CIA in 1997

Re: Archimedes Vanadium, America's most beloved poster

---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
NSF Dr. Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Ulvestad (math), Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey (physics), Scott Stanley
France Anne Cordova
Subra Suresh (bioengineer)
Arden Lee Bement Jr. (nuclear engineering)
Rita R. Colwell (microbiology)
Neal Francis Lane
John Howard Gibbons 1993
Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua
Canada-- NSERC , Alejandro Adem (math) , Navdeep Bains, Francois-Philippe Champagne

News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.

Aug 30, 2023, 10:19:20 PM (yesterday)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.
I received a letter today of Experiment results on Water Electrolysis of weighing the hydrogen test tube versus oxygen test tube and the result is 1/4 atomic mass units of Hydrogen compared to Oxygen.
The researcher weighing 1600 micrograms of hydrogen, using a Eisco-Brownlee-Water-Electrolysis Apparatus.
Using sulfuric acid as electrolyte on ultra pure water. Using low voltage DC of 1.5 volts, 1 amp.
I am not surprised that news of the true formula of Water is H4O comes so quickly. For not much in science is more important than knowing the truth of Water. And this means the start of the complete downfall and throwing out the sick Standard Model of Physics, for it is such an insane theory that it cannot get passed the idea of its subatomic particles as stick and ball, with no job, no function, no task. The Standard Model of Physics, is crazy insane physics for it is all postdiction, never prediction. The idea that the hydrogen atom is H2 not H, is because of the prediction of Atom Totality Theory where a atom is a proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law and all atoms require at least 1 capacitor. That means the one proton in H2 serves as a neutron to the other proton, storaging the electricity produced by the other proton.
The true Hydrogen Atom is H2 for all atoms need at least one capacitor, and one of the protons in H2 serves as a neutron.
Sad that chemistry and physics throughout the 20th century were too stupid to actually weigh the mass of hydrogen and oxygen in electrolysis, no, the ignorant fools stopped at looking when they saw the volume of hydrogen was twice that of oxygen. A real scientist is not that shoddy and slipshod ignorant, the real scientist then proceeds with -- let us weigh the hydrogen test tube mass versus the oxygen test tube mass.
Thanks for the news!!!!!
AP
News starting to come in that AP's Water Electrolysis Experiment proves the true formula of Water is H4O, not H2O is starting to come in.
There is another experiment that achieves the same result that Water is truly H4O and not H2O, but I suspect this second method is hugely fraught with difficulty.
The prediction of H4O comes from the Physics idea that a Atom is composed, all atoms mind you, is composed of a proton torus with muon/s inside going round and round thrusting through the torus in the Faraday law and producing electricity. So that when you have Hydrogen without a neutron, there is no way to collect the electricity produced by the Faraday law. Think of it as a automobile engine, you cannot have a engine if there is no crank shaft to collect the energy from the thrusting piston inside the crankcase.
Same thing with an Atom, it needs 3 parts-- muon as bar magnet, proton as torus of coils, and a capacitor to storage the produced electricity. If one of those parts is missing, the entity is a Subatomic particle and not a atom.
So, when we have Hydrogen as a proton with muon inside, it is not a Atom, until it has a neutron, or, has another proton of hydrogen H2, then it is a Atom.
So that H2 is not a molecule but a Atom. H alone is a subatomic particle.
Much harder than Water Electrolysis.
We need to get two identical containers.
We need to be able to make pure heavy-water with deuterium. Deuterium is proton + neutron as hydrogen. Proton + proton is H2 as hydrogen.
So we have two identical containers and we fill one with pure heavy water, deuterium water.
We have the second container and we fill it with pure (light) water.
We now weigh both of them.
If AP is correct, that water is really H4O and not H2O, then both containers should weigh almost the same. Only a tiny fraction difference because the neutron is known to be 940MeV versus proton in Old Physics as 938MeV a tiny difference of 2MeV, but we realize we have a huge number of water molecules in the two identical containers.
If water is truly H4O, the weights should be almost the same. If water is H2O, then there is a **large difference** in weights.
But the Water Electrolysis experiment is much easier to conduct and get results.
And, there is the biological processes that apparently cannot distinguish between heavy water and that of regular normal water.
Deuterium Water is the same in biology as is normal regular water. This means that water must be H4O, due to biology as proof.
Deuterium Water in atomic mass units is 16 for the oxygen and 4 for the deuterium.
Regular normal Water in atomic mass units is 16 for the oxygen and 4 for the 4 protons in H4O.
Old Physics and Old Chemistry had regular water as H2O in atomic mass units of 16 oxygen and 2 hydrogen for 2 protons.
If biology functions whether heavy water or normal water all the same, then water itself must be H4O.
Now, there maybe some animal or plant that can separate out heavy water from H4O water???
Searching the literature today for where biology needs as essential deuterium water. And not too surprised that it is a essential requirement in metabolism. In fact one web site listed the need for deuterium more than the need of many minerals and vitamins.
Now tonight I came up with two new exciting experiments to verify that Water is truly H4O and not H2O.
H4O is 4 protons with muons inside the 840MeV proton toruses.
Deuterium water is DOD. And the difference between D2O and H4O is merely the difference of 4MeV for as last reported, neutron = 940MeV and proton (with muon inside) is 938MeV, a difference of 2MeV but for water is 2+2 = 4MeV.
So these two new experiments take advantage of the fact that what we think is normal regular water is actually very close to heavy water of D2O, with only a 4MeV difference.
EXPERIMENT #3 Water layers in still pond of D2O mixed with H4O (what we thought was H2O.
So in this experiment we get a clear glass container and mix H4O with D2O. If Old Physics is correct, the heavy water should sink rapidly in the container while the light water floats to the top rapidly. And we have some sort of beam of photons that can distinguish D2O from H4O (thought of as H2O. We obtain pure D2O and pure H4O each filling 1/2 of the container. We stir and mix them. And then we observe with the EM beam for separation. If the light water is truly H4O, it takes a long time for the D2O to be on bottom and H4O on top. We measure the time of a settled container and determine this time from the theoretical 4MeV difference should take a long time, whereas if Old Physics is correct, the separation would be almost instantly and quick time.
EXPERIMENT #4 also plays on this minor difference of 4MeV. We devise a sort of squirt gun for D2O and a identical squirt gun for H4O (what we call H2O). We put pure D2O in one squirt gun and the H40 or light water in the other squirt gun. Both guns forcing the water a certain distance.
If AP is correct that light water is really H4O and not H2O as we squirt both guns, where the water lands should be almost the same distance considering H4O is only 4MeV apart from D2O.
If Old Physics and Old Chemistry is correct, then D2O water is 940 + 940 = 1880MeV apart from light water of H2O, and H4O is only 4MeV apart.
So where the squirt gun lands the D2O is a very much shorter distance than a H2O land, but a H4 land distance is nearly the same as the D2O land.
These two experiments are very exciting and would be a very nice confirming evidence to Water Electrolysis actual weighing the mass in atomic mass units.

Searching the literature today for where biology needs as essential deuterium water. And not too surprised that it is a essential requirement in metabolism. In fact one web site listed the need for deuterium more than the need of many minerals and vitamins.
Now tonight I came up with two new exciting experiments to verify that Water is truly H4O and not H2O.
H4O is 4 protons with muons inside the 840MeV proton toruses.
Deuterium water is DOD. And the difference between D2O and H4O is merely the difference of 4MeV for as last reported, neutron = 940MeV and proton (with muon inside) is 938MeV, a difference of 2MeV but for water is 2+2 = 4MeV.
So these two new experiments take advantage of the fact that what we think is normal regular water is actually very close to heavy water of D2O, with only a 4MeV difference.
EXPERIMENT #3 Water layers in still pond of D2O mixed with H4O (what we thought was H2O.
So in this experiment we get a clear glass container and mix H4O with D2O. If Old Physics is correct, the heavy water should sink rapidly in the container while the light water floats to the top rapidly. And we have some sort of beam of photons that can distinguish D2O from H4O (thought of as H2O. We obtain pure D2O and pure H4O each filling 1/2 of the container. We stir and mix them. And then we observe with the EM beam for separation. If the light water is truly H4O, it takes a long time for the D2O to be on bottom and H4O on top. We measure the time of a settled container and determine this time from the theoretical 4MeV difference should take a long time, whereas if Old Physics is correct, the separation would be almost instantly and quick time.

Apparently this Experiment is already done and called for-- There is Uniform Distribution of heavy water Deuterium Water in the Oceans, Lakes, Ponds, Streams and Rivers. Heavy Water is not layered in the oceans or lakes or ponds or streams or rivers. Uniformity means that the difference between D2O and H4O is so slight of a difference (only 4MeV, compared to 1880MeV for H2O, that Brownian motion keeps the D2O and H4O in a Uniform Distribution in all bodies of water. I was going through the research literature today and find that scientists discover Uniformity of Distribution of deuterium water. This thus closes the case on Water, for uniformity of distribution of D2O implies that Water is itself H4O and not H2O.

My 250th published book.

TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a laboratory science, even more so than physics, so a first year college student in the lab to test whether Water is really H4O and not H2O is mighty educational.
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistry textbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible in Old Chemistry, Old Physics where they had do-nothing subatomic particles that sit around and do nothing or go whizzing around the outside of balls in a nucleus, in a mindless circling. Once every subatomic particle has a job, task, function, then water cannot be H2O but rather H4O. And a hydrogen atom cannot be H alone but is actually H2. H2 is not a molecule of hydrogen but a full fledged Atom, a single atom of hydrogen.
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Water molecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are the bar magnets. Neutrons are the capacitors as parallel plates, the outer skin cover of atoms.
Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ July 21, 2023
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 168 pages