Archimedes Plutonium
2020-04-02 02:51:47 UTC
Rey de Reyes de la Ciencia --AP-- King of Science, what we throw out of Old Math as fakery// TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 19-20 Sophomore year College, math textbook series, book 4
First an aside for this is in the probability and statistics of Junior year College
#5
HISTORY OF THE PROTON MASS and the 945 MeV //Atom Totality series, book 5 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: 16 pages
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: The 938MeV is in error because they fail to use the best modern up to
date physics of E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4, and if you use that, you get the
true value of proton + muon = 945MeV
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:50:13 +0000
The 938MeV is in error because they fail to use the best modern up to date physics of E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4, and if you use that, you get the true value of proton + muon = 945MeV
But now I am beginning to realize where the error of 938 when it should be 945 is coming from. It is coming from the fact that ever since the proton was discovered with Rutherford in early 1900s, and its mass measured, did not use relativistic calculations. Rutherford did not have this formula of
E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4. And no physicist after Rutherford bothered to think straight, think clear.
The 938MeV is in error because they fail to use the best modern up to date physics of E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4, and if you use that, you get the true value of proton + muon = 945MeV
AP
Listing the Errors of Old Math
Now I do need to discuss the Errors of Math in General and the errors of math in geometry in particular. I have the feeling that Geometry is the more important of the two-- algebra - geometry. This list appears in Sophomore College year and now in Senior College year, meant to be a guide and a organizing of what must be covered before graduating from College.
Errors mostly, but not always, according to importance:
1) No curves exist in Geometry, only finer and smaller straight line segments attached to one another
2) Space has gaps in between one point and the next point. These gaps are empty space from one point to the next point, for example in 10 Grid there is no number between .1 and .2, and in 100 Grid there exists no number between .01 and .02.
3) Infinity has a borderline and there is a microinfinity compared to a macroinfinity. For example in 10 Grid, the microinfinity is .1 if we exclude 0 and so there is no number smaller than .1 and no number larger than 10 in 10 Grid, where 10 is macroinfinity.
4) The 1st Quadrant Only in Coordinate System Geometry. Sad that the first coordinate system of Descartes was correct but soon became corrupted with 4 quadrants. See Mathematical Thought, Volume 1, Kline, 1972, page 303. Where Fermat then Descartes starts the Cartesian Coordinate System as 1 axis only and from 0 rightwards, meaning in our modern day math, 1st Quadrant Only. Why did math screw up on coordinate systems? I suppose some clowns thought negative numbers were true and they wanted ease of drawing a circle with center at 0. When they could have just as easily drawn the circle in 1st Quadrant Only.
5) Calculus needed a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Old Math never provided such, instead they provided some stupid Limit argument. The reason for the creation of the Limit disaster was that the French mathematician Cauchy got sick and tired of hearing his smartest students complain that the width of rectangles in the integral are 0 width, and those smart students could not, for the life of them understand how a rectangle with 0 width has any interior area. So instead of the math community denouncing the limit, instead they elevated the fakery.
6) Further in Calculus, they knew you could do a transform of coordinate points to turn any function into a polynomial function, a method of Lagrange. However, they in Old Math were too stupid to take this transform to its highest form-- all functions are polynomial functions and only polynomial functions. When you learn that-- the derivative and integral of any and every function of math is a snap breeze simple and easy.
7) With the error filled 4 quadrants, when it should be 1st Quadrant Only, we have Trigonometry's sine and cosine with the fakery of sinusoid wave when it never was that. The sine and cosine are semicircle waves, and no sinusoid wave exists
8) There is only one Geometry-- Euclidean, and there is not three distinct geometries of elliptical Riemannian or hyperbolic Lobachevsky. Those two are just duals that make up Euclidean.
9) Torus, volume and surface area formulas in Old Math are all screwed up and in error because they imagined bending a cylinder to form a torus. This brings back memories, for I had to do a percentage formula, since I could not follow the fake way of bending a cylinder. Where 78.5% of Disc Torus (pi)R^2h - (pi)r^2h is the volume of Circle Torus, and 78.5% of Disc Torus 2(pi)Rh + 2(pi)rh + 2 ((pi)R^2 - (pi)r^2) is the surface area of Circle Torus.
10) Ellipse is never a conic slant cut, always a cylinder slant cut
11) Parallelepiped volume is simply a*b*c and the use of trigonometry is unnecessary. The Parallelepiped actually has the physics concept of angular momentum for a given rectangular box produces one and only one parallelepiped.
12) All of Old Logic such as the textbooks by Copi and Boole and Jevons with their messed up operators such as 10 OR 4 = 14, are thrown out onto the rubbish pile of shame. Set theory is thrown out completely, although we can use the word "set" to mean collection, group. All of Cantor set theory is phony baloney, not worth reading.
13) Rationals and Negative Numbers thrown out completely because the only true numbers are Decimal Grid Numbers. The Smallest set of numbers is the 10 Grid System with its infinitesimal being .1, and the entire collection of 10 Grid is 0, .1, .2, .3, . . , 9.9, 10.0 where .1 is microinfinity and 10 is macroinfinity. In 100 Grid the infinitesimal is .01, in 1000 Grid the infinitesimal is .001, etc etc. In such a true system of numbers, all the numbers are built by mathematical-induction. Not just one group of numbers-- counting, but all numbers from mathematical-induction.
14) Irrationals thrown out completely (ditto to Rationals and Negative numbers)
15) Reals thrown out completely (ditto)
16) Imaginary numbers and Complex numbers are b.s. and thrown out completely
17) Trigonometry pared down so much-- 90% thrown out, and no trigonometry ever enters Calculus. Only real use of trigonometry is when you have an angle and side, you can figure out the rest of the right triangle. But no, when you give true math to a gaggle of kooks, it is not long before they stretch true math way way out of its "zone of truth". And even fill up by 50% of calculus, when trig should never be in calculus.
18) Continuum and continuity thrown out as horrible fakery (in fact the Quantum Mechanic Physics of early 1900s had a better handle on the truth and reality of math with discrete space)
19) Topology is junk and a waste of time for many reasons such as continuum does not exist, and the fact that the idea of "bending" is not really ever a mathematical concept
20) Prime numbers are fakery for the Naturals never had division in the first place. The real true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers and they do not have a concept of "prime". The key evidence that primes were silly stupid error, was the fact that there never existed a "pattern for primes". And all of mathematics is a science of "pattern". If any part of mathematics has no pattern, is indication that such was a phony fake concept to start with. Below begins a write-up of Math topics all have pattern, if not, then not math.
21) Limit in Old Math was a horrible fakery, built by lowly idiots of math who wanted to get away from the smart students asking them-- stupid professor, come back here,-- how does a zero width rectangle even have interior area
22) Lobachevsky, Riemann geometries and all NonEuclidean geometries are fakery and a waste of time. Many math professors want to spice up their boring math, so they ventured way way off into the twilight-zone of math with NonEuclidean geometry, like eating the hottest peppers in the world for breakfast
23) Boole logic a horrid gaggle of monumental mistakes; one colossal error was their insane 10 OR 4 = 14. Boole was a monumental idiot of logic that he went to college to teach in a rainstorm without umbrella and when he got there, shivering, and no commonsense to switch into dry clothes, taught in rain soaked clothes then ordered his wife to give him cold bathes and wet his bed in order to fight pneumonia, and western culture puts such a logical misfit as a figurehead of logic
24) Galois Algebra of Group, Ring, Field a fakery and waste of time
25) Dimension stops at 3rd, and 3rd is the last and highest dimension possible, for there is no 4th or higher dimensions.
26) High School in Old Math spends too much time on quadratic equations with their negative numbers and imaginary-complex numbers when such never existed in the first place and where they violate a principle of algebra-- that an equation of algebra-- the right-side of the equation must always have a greater than zero number. So we throw out all quadratic equations of Old Math as fake math.
27) High School in Old Math spends too much time on teaching in geometry the congruence of SSS, ASA etc etc and we should pare that back somewhat, as excess teaching of a tiny minor concept.
28) Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations are now seen as superfluous when all functions are polynomials
29) Graph theory-- 90% worthless for it is based on the fakery of continuum
30) Probability and Statistics theory now becomes a part of Sigma Error in New Math, the Old Math Probability and Statistics theory were wastrel and thrown out for it is based on a continuum and they had no proper definition of "probability" that fits with statistics. We keep Probability and Statistics in new math but revise and overhaul it completely.
31) We definitely throw out all Old Math Calculus textbooks as mostly propaganda, based on the silly Limit and the Continuum
32) We throw out the Euclidean Axioms of Geometry and start anew, with axioms based on Physics as geometry truth
33) Fractal theory totally junk and a waste-- uses ill-defined infinity
34) Vector Calculus (not the vector concept itself), Chaos theory, Complex Analysis, utter junk and waste of time since polynomial theory covers all functions
35) Differential geometry, Measure theory fakery since they never had the correct numbers of math, and they had the fakery continuum
36) We throw out all the Apollonius conic sections because he misidentified the ellipse. The ellipse is a cylinder section, never a conic section and the oval is the slant cut of the cone, never the ellipse. We replace the entire conic sections by the AP theory of axes of symmetry using Decimal Grid Numbers for algebra and strip-wavelength-geometry axioms.
37) Most of Algebra, starting with Linear Algebra is esoteric minutiae, or, just cute tools for specialized math, just as the Binomial Theorem and the Pascal triangle, all cute esoteric minutiae. Certainly none of which is appropriate in school math education. These topics are for those interested in sideline math, but does not belong in mainstream math. Algebra reaches its pinnacle of importance with the Polynomial Function transform. Anything else in Algebra is sideline esoteric minutiae. These are not wrong or false math, just not important enough math to be mainstream worthy of math education.
This list is ongoing, and is a bulletin-board of errors of Old Math and useful for Teaching True Mathematics. I insert this list into Sophomore College-year as a guide. To show students what math to avoid, to steer away from, as a total fake and waste of time.
Proof Stars shine from Faraday Law, not from fusion // (Physics series for High School Book 12) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium
On 30JAN2020, while watching the BBC on TV, was news and video images of the Sun's surface, showing what looks like golden chips, with white flowing magnetism or electricity as the white flowing in between the golden chips. This was exciting, extremely exciting because with this "observational data" I could use it to prove that the Sun and stars shine not from fusion but from Faraday Law of each and every atom inside the Sun having its muons thrust through its attendant proton coil and producing electricity and magnetism via the Faraday and Ampere laws. This is what gives stars their shining outbursts of energy, their starshine or for the sun, sunshine. If star energy was due to fusion, there would be very little light in the universe. There would be no life on Earth. So with the 30 JAN2020 report, I can use those video imagines to actually prove our Sun is a Faraday Law machine, not a fusion machine.
Cover Picture is my photograph of the BBC video image. A BBC quote: "The Daniel K Inouye Solar Telescope on Hawaii has released pictures that show features as small as 30km across."
Length: 20 pages
Product details
File Size: 963 KB
Print Length: 20 pages
Publication Date: January 30, 2020
I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium
AP- Rey de Reyes de la Ciencia
First an aside for this is in the probability and statistics of Junior year College
#5
HISTORY OF THE PROTON MASS and the 945 MeV //Atom Totality series, book 5 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: 16 pages
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:50:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: The 938MeV is in error because they fail to use the best modern up to
date physics of E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4, and if you use that, you get the
true value of proton + muon = 945MeV
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:50:13 +0000
The 938MeV is in error because they fail to use the best modern up to date physics of E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4, and if you use that, you get the true value of proton + muon = 945MeV
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:17:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: I believe I spotted the reason Old Physics reports the proton at
938MeV when it should report it at 945MeV
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:17:53 +0000
I believe I spotted the reason Old Physics reports the proton at 938MeV when it should report it at 945MeV
I believe I know where the error of the proton rest mass at 938 comes from when it truly is 945MeV as 840MeV proton + 105MeV muon
INTRODUCTION TO NUCLEAR AND PARTICLE PHYSICS, FOURTH EDITION
https://books.google.com › books
MITTAL, V. K., VERMA, R. C., GUPTA, S,\. C. - 2018 - Science
This model obviously avoids the failures of proton–electron hypothesis. ... ́ 10–10 J » 945 MeV This value is slightly greater than the rest mass energy of proton, ...
In that last reference of Mittal, Verma, Gupta they probably pointed out the mistake in Old Physics as to the reason they report 938MeV when in truth the particle is 945MeV.
They get 1.51 *10^-10 J
From the relativistic equation E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4
Ever since my 2017 discovery that the real proton was 840 MeV with a muon inside it doing the Faraday Law making the total mass be 840+105 MeV = 945MeV, that I thought the reported 938MeV was due to statistical error in the lab set up to measure, where they were subtracting nonsense off their data, or were not including some energy.Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 06:17:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: I believe I spotted the reason Old Physics reports the proton at
938MeV when it should report it at 945MeV
Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 14:17:53 +0000
I believe I spotted the reason Old Physics reports the proton at 938MeV when it should report it at 945MeV
I believe I know where the error of the proton rest mass at 938 comes from when it truly is 945MeV as 840MeV proton + 105MeV muon
INTRODUCTION TO NUCLEAR AND PARTICLE PHYSICS, FOURTH EDITION
https://books.google.com › books
MITTAL, V. K., VERMA, R. C., GUPTA, S,\. C. - 2018 - Science
This model obviously avoids the failures of proton–electron hypothesis. ... ́ 10–10 J » 945 MeV This value is slightly greater than the rest mass energy of proton, ...
In that last reference of Mittal, Verma, Gupta they probably pointed out the mistake in Old Physics as to the reason they report 938MeV when in truth the particle is 945MeV.
They get 1.51 *10^-10 J
From the relativistic equation E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4
But now I am beginning to realize where the error of 938 when it should be 945 is coming from. It is coming from the fact that ever since the proton was discovered with Rutherford in early 1900s, and its mass measured, did not use relativistic calculations. Rutherford did not have this formula of
E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4. And no physicist after Rutherford bothered to think straight, think clear.
The 938MeV is in error because they fail to use the best modern up to date physics of E^2 = p^2 c^2 + m_0^2 c^4, and if you use that, you get the true value of proton + muon = 945MeV
AP
Listing the Errors of Old Math
Now I do need to discuss the Errors of Math in General and the errors of math in geometry in particular. I have the feeling that Geometry is the more important of the two-- algebra - geometry. This list appears in Sophomore College year and now in Senior College year, meant to be a guide and a organizing of what must be covered before graduating from College.
Errors mostly, but not always, according to importance:
1) No curves exist in Geometry, only finer and smaller straight line segments attached to one another
2) Space has gaps in between one point and the next point. These gaps are empty space from one point to the next point, for example in 10 Grid there is no number between .1 and .2, and in 100 Grid there exists no number between .01 and .02.
3) Infinity has a borderline and there is a microinfinity compared to a macroinfinity. For example in 10 Grid, the microinfinity is .1 if we exclude 0 and so there is no number smaller than .1 and no number larger than 10 in 10 Grid, where 10 is macroinfinity.
4) The 1st Quadrant Only in Coordinate System Geometry. Sad that the first coordinate system of Descartes was correct but soon became corrupted with 4 quadrants. See Mathematical Thought, Volume 1, Kline, 1972, page 303. Where Fermat then Descartes starts the Cartesian Coordinate System as 1 axis only and from 0 rightwards, meaning in our modern day math, 1st Quadrant Only. Why did math screw up on coordinate systems? I suppose some clowns thought negative numbers were true and they wanted ease of drawing a circle with center at 0. When they could have just as easily drawn the circle in 1st Quadrant Only.
5) Calculus needed a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, but Old Math never provided such, instead they provided some stupid Limit argument. The reason for the creation of the Limit disaster was that the French mathematician Cauchy got sick and tired of hearing his smartest students complain that the width of rectangles in the integral are 0 width, and those smart students could not, for the life of them understand how a rectangle with 0 width has any interior area. So instead of the math community denouncing the limit, instead they elevated the fakery.
6) Further in Calculus, they knew you could do a transform of coordinate points to turn any function into a polynomial function, a method of Lagrange. However, they in Old Math were too stupid to take this transform to its highest form-- all functions are polynomial functions and only polynomial functions. When you learn that-- the derivative and integral of any and every function of math is a snap breeze simple and easy.
7) With the error filled 4 quadrants, when it should be 1st Quadrant Only, we have Trigonometry's sine and cosine with the fakery of sinusoid wave when it never was that. The sine and cosine are semicircle waves, and no sinusoid wave exists
8) There is only one Geometry-- Euclidean, and there is not three distinct geometries of elliptical Riemannian or hyperbolic Lobachevsky. Those two are just duals that make up Euclidean.
9) Torus, volume and surface area formulas in Old Math are all screwed up and in error because they imagined bending a cylinder to form a torus. This brings back memories, for I had to do a percentage formula, since I could not follow the fake way of bending a cylinder. Where 78.5% of Disc Torus (pi)R^2h - (pi)r^2h is the volume of Circle Torus, and 78.5% of Disc Torus 2(pi)Rh + 2(pi)rh + 2 ((pi)R^2 - (pi)r^2) is the surface area of Circle Torus.
10) Ellipse is never a conic slant cut, always a cylinder slant cut
11) Parallelepiped volume is simply a*b*c and the use of trigonometry is unnecessary. The Parallelepiped actually has the physics concept of angular momentum for a given rectangular box produces one and only one parallelepiped.
12) All of Old Logic such as the textbooks by Copi and Boole and Jevons with their messed up operators such as 10 OR 4 = 14, are thrown out onto the rubbish pile of shame. Set theory is thrown out completely, although we can use the word "set" to mean collection, group. All of Cantor set theory is phony baloney, not worth reading.
13) Rationals and Negative Numbers thrown out completely because the only true numbers are Decimal Grid Numbers. The Smallest set of numbers is the 10 Grid System with its infinitesimal being .1, and the entire collection of 10 Grid is 0, .1, .2, .3, . . , 9.9, 10.0 where .1 is microinfinity and 10 is macroinfinity. In 100 Grid the infinitesimal is .01, in 1000 Grid the infinitesimal is .001, etc etc. In such a true system of numbers, all the numbers are built by mathematical-induction. Not just one group of numbers-- counting, but all numbers from mathematical-induction.
14) Irrationals thrown out completely (ditto to Rationals and Negative numbers)
15) Reals thrown out completely (ditto)
16) Imaginary numbers and Complex numbers are b.s. and thrown out completely
17) Trigonometry pared down so much-- 90% thrown out, and no trigonometry ever enters Calculus. Only real use of trigonometry is when you have an angle and side, you can figure out the rest of the right triangle. But no, when you give true math to a gaggle of kooks, it is not long before they stretch true math way way out of its "zone of truth". And even fill up by 50% of calculus, when trig should never be in calculus.
18) Continuum and continuity thrown out as horrible fakery (in fact the Quantum Mechanic Physics of early 1900s had a better handle on the truth and reality of math with discrete space)
19) Topology is junk and a waste of time for many reasons such as continuum does not exist, and the fact that the idea of "bending" is not really ever a mathematical concept
20) Prime numbers are fakery for the Naturals never had division in the first place. The real true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Numbers and they do not have a concept of "prime". The key evidence that primes were silly stupid error, was the fact that there never existed a "pattern for primes". And all of mathematics is a science of "pattern". If any part of mathematics has no pattern, is indication that such was a phony fake concept to start with. Below begins a write-up of Math topics all have pattern, if not, then not math.
21) Limit in Old Math was a horrible fakery, built by lowly idiots of math who wanted to get away from the smart students asking them-- stupid professor, come back here,-- how does a zero width rectangle even have interior area
22) Lobachevsky, Riemann geometries and all NonEuclidean geometries are fakery and a waste of time. Many math professors want to spice up their boring math, so they ventured way way off into the twilight-zone of math with NonEuclidean geometry, like eating the hottest peppers in the world for breakfast
23) Boole logic a horrid gaggle of monumental mistakes; one colossal error was their insane 10 OR 4 = 14. Boole was a monumental idiot of logic that he went to college to teach in a rainstorm without umbrella and when he got there, shivering, and no commonsense to switch into dry clothes, taught in rain soaked clothes then ordered his wife to give him cold bathes and wet his bed in order to fight pneumonia, and western culture puts such a logical misfit as a figurehead of logic
24) Galois Algebra of Group, Ring, Field a fakery and waste of time
25) Dimension stops at 3rd, and 3rd is the last and highest dimension possible, for there is no 4th or higher dimensions.
26) High School in Old Math spends too much time on quadratic equations with their negative numbers and imaginary-complex numbers when such never existed in the first place and where they violate a principle of algebra-- that an equation of algebra-- the right-side of the equation must always have a greater than zero number. So we throw out all quadratic equations of Old Math as fake math.
27) High School in Old Math spends too much time on teaching in geometry the congruence of SSS, ASA etc etc and we should pare that back somewhat, as excess teaching of a tiny minor concept.
28) Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations are now seen as superfluous when all functions are polynomials
29) Graph theory-- 90% worthless for it is based on the fakery of continuum
30) Probability and Statistics theory now becomes a part of Sigma Error in New Math, the Old Math Probability and Statistics theory were wastrel and thrown out for it is based on a continuum and they had no proper definition of "probability" that fits with statistics. We keep Probability and Statistics in new math but revise and overhaul it completely.
31) We definitely throw out all Old Math Calculus textbooks as mostly propaganda, based on the silly Limit and the Continuum
32) We throw out the Euclidean Axioms of Geometry and start anew, with axioms based on Physics as geometry truth
33) Fractal theory totally junk and a waste-- uses ill-defined infinity
34) Vector Calculus (not the vector concept itself), Chaos theory, Complex Analysis, utter junk and waste of time since polynomial theory covers all functions
35) Differential geometry, Measure theory fakery since they never had the correct numbers of math, and they had the fakery continuum
36) We throw out all the Apollonius conic sections because he misidentified the ellipse. The ellipse is a cylinder section, never a conic section and the oval is the slant cut of the cone, never the ellipse. We replace the entire conic sections by the AP theory of axes of symmetry using Decimal Grid Numbers for algebra and strip-wavelength-geometry axioms.
37) Most of Algebra, starting with Linear Algebra is esoteric minutiae, or, just cute tools for specialized math, just as the Binomial Theorem and the Pascal triangle, all cute esoteric minutiae. Certainly none of which is appropriate in school math education. These topics are for those interested in sideline math, but does not belong in mainstream math. Algebra reaches its pinnacle of importance with the Polynomial Function transform. Anything else in Algebra is sideline esoteric minutiae. These are not wrong or false math, just not important enough math to be mainstream worthy of math education.
This list is ongoing, and is a bulletin-board of errors of Old Math and useful for Teaching True Mathematics. I insert this list into Sophomore College-year as a guide. To show students what math to avoid, to steer away from, as a total fake and waste of time.
Proof Stars shine from Faraday Law, not from fusion // (Physics series for High School Book 12) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium
On 30JAN2020, while watching the BBC on TV, was news and video images of the Sun's surface, showing what looks like golden chips, with white flowing magnetism or electricity as the white flowing in between the golden chips. This was exciting, extremely exciting because with this "observational data" I could use it to prove that the Sun and stars shine not from fusion but from Faraday Law of each and every atom inside the Sun having its muons thrust through its attendant proton coil and producing electricity and magnetism via the Faraday and Ampere laws. This is what gives stars their shining outbursts of energy, their starshine or for the sun, sunshine. If star energy was due to fusion, there would be very little light in the universe. There would be no life on Earth. So with the 30 JAN2020 report, I can use those video imagines to actually prove our Sun is a Faraday Law machine, not a fusion machine.
Cover Picture is my photograph of the BBC video image. A BBC quote: "The Daniel K Inouye Solar Telescope on Hawaii has released pictures that show features as small as 30km across."
Length: 20 pages
Product details
File Size: 963 KB
Print Length: 20 pages
Publication Date: January 30, 2020
I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium
AP- Rey de Reyes de la Ciencia