Discussion:
Math professors with few marbles of brain power to reason-- the Equation of math can never have a zero all alone on the rightside of the equation-- thus all of Galois Group Ring Field theory is phony baloney and a waste of time in College classrooms
(too old to reply)
Archimedes Plutonium
2024-02-13 20:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Primes are ILL defined in Mathematics // Math focus
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: AP's 200th book of science// Primes are ILL defined in Mathematics // Math focus by Archimedes Plutonium.

A shame that Galois invented Groups, Ring,Field over the nonsense of quintic. But by 1830 in math history, it was not known that a Well Defined Equation of math had to have a positive nonzero number to the rightside of the equation at all times, and never be zero. Because the moment you do that, there never arises a problem of quintic.

And what Galois should have done with his time, was reason that groups rings and fields need to be invented for the purpose of a Well Defined Operator in mathematics.

It should not be AP that corrects all of Algebra of mathematics, but it should have been Galois or Gauss or Riemann to have done that by 1830.

Prime concept is a hallucination of Old Math. Ask any physicist where does the concept of prime arise in physics? It never does, and the reason being is mathematicians are kooks in defining prime.

Sure, mathematicians have known for centuries that primes have No Pattern, have No Formula. But you would then expect at least one marble of brain power from these mathematicians to notice that if No Pattern, No Formula, that something is wrong with the definition of primes.

What is wrong in the definition? It is simple and tells us why primes have no pattern, have no formula. To be Well Defined Operator, a operator must obey N#M = P where # is the operator (in our case, division) and N,M,P must be Counting Numbers to be well defined. So in other words a Well Defined operator over a set of numbers, must deliver to you when you operate N#M, must deliver to you another Counting Number P. Primes of Old Math only sometimes obeys that axiom of well defined. And, immediately we have numbers outside of Counting Numbers such as 1/2, 1/3, 2/3, etc etc.

Cover Picture: Is my photograph of my hand written formula of Well Defined Operator N # M = P. The N,M,P represent numbers from a given set. The symbol # represents the operator. A operator is well defined if all N,M,P are inside the given set. The operator is ILL defined if some P are not inside the original set.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BB6PWW2B
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 18, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 384 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 64 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled


#11-1, My 14th published book of science.

Correcting Math// Math focus series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

In the 1990s, I took a survey of Math Professors doing a simple math proof of Euclid's Infinitude of Primes Proof, and found that 84% of Math Professors failed to deliver a valid proof in that survey. The reason I believe this poor performance is that math professors for the most part are never required to take Logic courses while in college, to teach them how to think straight, think clearly. As a result, the world is cluttered with their fake mathematics with no hope of cleaning up their messes. And instead of fixing their mistakes and errors, they keep on cluttering the world with more fake math.

I propose that all math professors be required to take Logic in College as a mandatory requirement. Further, I recommend that all math prizes such as Abel, Fields, etc, that all math prizes awarded to those that can show they first fixed errors "fixed something of Old Math" before any of their manuscript of a proof of something else new in math be considered or given a look-over. That is-- prove yourself first -- you can fix math before we want to look at your new offerings. Show yourself as being math intelligent by fixing errors, rather than throw another error filled fake-proof onto mathematics-- Appel & Haken fake 4 Color Mapping, Wiles's fake FLT, Hales's fake Kepler Packing, Tao & Green fake number theory proof. Show us you can fix math, then we can consider anything new you want to offer.

Cover picture: A tractrix formed by a pocket-watch on graph paper, for this is how infinity borderline is determined.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07PQ2CXBY
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 15, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 2020 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 ‏ : ‎ 721 pages


#31-4, My 272nd published book of science.


Reals are fake, and the only true valid numbers of math are Decimal Grid Numbers//math-physics

by Archimedes Plutonium

Preface: The largest holding back of modern day math is they have the wrong numbers for mathematics. They have what they call the "Reals" which is a rag bag collection of integers, rationals, irrationals. How did it get to be so bad that mathematics never even had the correct numbers that compose mathematics? It was all because of a underlying quest for ever more and more continuity, the continuum. Which is really just a silly idealization. And opposite of where Physics went starting the year 1900 with Planck introducing Quantum Mechanics into the world of science. "Quantum" means discrete; means no continuum. However, the people in mathematics from 1900 to AP's 2013 geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus were just not intelligent enough to say "stop- if physics is discrete-- should not mathematics be discrete and no continuums".


Cover Picture: My iphone photograph of the first 50 numbers, excluding 0, in the 1000 Decimal Grid System. What replaces the fake Reals of mathematics are the Decimal Grid Systems of numbers, starting with the 10 Grid, then the 100 Grid, then the 1000 Grid and going out to the infinity borderline as the 10^604 Grid. It does not have to go far in Grids where the numbers are so small that the eyes and mind feel like there is continuity, as the holes and gaps from one number to the successor number gets smaller and smaller. So continuity is just a illusion-delusion-idealization of the mind for which physics in Quantum Mechanics proved is fakery. And even the Electromagnetic Spectrum of light waves are discrete, not a continuum.


Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0CT499CPY
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ January 22, 2024
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 653 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 ‏ : ‎ 76 pages


#31-5, My 273rd published book of science.


True proper graphing coordinate system of math and physics// math-physics

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: I revolutionized the number theory of mathematics with Decimal Grid Number Systems and while doing my 272nd book of science the question kept occurring to me as to how many points of a Grid Graph paper will intersect with a circle. As I was playing around with the question I come to some remarkable facts and conclusions. For a decade I have been troubled with the idea that circles could not be made in grid systems because only 4 points of intersection at maximum. Now I see that I have a minimum 24 points of intersection as the cover picture shows. However, the most remarkable conclusion of all is that Old Math Geometry never had a **well-defined point in mathematics geometry ** and this book is the first time in math history we well-define what it means to be a point in geometry!!!


Cover Picture: The key to my success in this book is making two quarter-circles, one of radius 3 and the other of radius 3.14. Both 3 and 3.14 are well defined in Decimal Grid Numbers as two points in 100 Grid. I was thinking only 4 points of intersection occurred with any full circle. But what if we make the entire small square in the graphing paper, call it the point. When we do this, there are 6 squares or points in a quarter-circle, meaning 4 x 6 = 24 at minimum intersections for the whole of 2 circles as bandwidth circles.

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

1) My history of the ideas in this book.

2) I find myself lost and stumped, maybe turn to geometry hands-on drawing.

3) My 2013 geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

4) The axioms of geometry must be reviewed and overhauled where curves like circles have width and depth.

5) My cover picture is two circles radius of 3 and 3.14 and what that produces.

6) A connection between square root 2 = 1.414... and pi = 3.141....

7) A connection between square root 10 = 3.162... and the Golden Mean Ratio 1.618....

8) Well-Defined point in mathematics geometry.

9) Conclusion.

10) Summary.

11) Postscript: Is there a Axiom for living Life?


Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0CT8C9YRK
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ January 24, 2024
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 808 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 ‏ : ‎ 25 pages


#11-2, 35th published book

True Trigonometry and remove all trigonometry out of Calculus// Math focus series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Last revision was 18Jan2022. And this is AP's 35th published book of science.

Preface: This book was published by Amazon's Kindle in 5 April 2019, with 33 pages. And the book explains several important principles about mathematics, trigonometry and the relationship of numbers to angles. Unfortunately, as I wrote the book starting 2016 and up to publishing in 5 April 2019, I thought I had the matter mostly closed for the subject of trigonometry. That sine and cosine were Semicircle Waves, bobbing up and down in semicircle pattern looking like this ^v^v^v^. But then comes May and June of 2019 and another major discovery about trigonometry. A major discovery that changes all of Trigonometry graphing of functions and what those functions are, in the first place. So instead of making a singular correction-- no sinusoid wave but rather a semicircle wave, by May of 2019, I was having to throw out even the Semicircle wave and replace it with its true Trigonometry wave-- the cycloid, where you can have the Pure Cycloid wave or the Semicircle Cycloid Wave and all sorts of cycloid waves in-between pure and semicircle. That discovery of May 2019, changes all of Trigonometry and forces me now to make this book be a "History of True Trigonometry".

The sine and cosine are truly and really Semicircle-Cycloid Waves, and not Semicircle Waves. The difference is that a Cycloid wave is not an up and down wave, but a movement "across" such as this picture ^^^^^^^^^^

Cover Picture: My graphing of a Semicircle-Cycloid Wave atop Harold Jacob's book, 1970, "Mathematics a Human Endeavor", page 293 showing a Pure-Cycloid Wave. A sinusoid wave of Old Math is purely muddle headed wrong trash fiction math.



Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07QDG5TH2
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ April 5, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1421 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 126 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #673,548 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #31 in Trigonometry (Kindle Store)
◦ #205 in Trigonometry (Books)


#11-3, 52nd published book

When does an equation of math, (or Logic), exist? AP's famous Axiom of Algebra// Math focus series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

When vacationing in Siracusa Sicily in 1999 and buying oranges from a roadside fruit stand and weighing the oranges makes one realize that you cannot have 0 all alone on one side of a equation and still be a math equation.

Then in 2000s, especially 2015 I was writing math textbooks and the issue arose where I was removing all negative numbers out of mathematics. And how that can be done for polynomials. In that removal process, I discovered the now famous Algebra Axiom, that you cannot have a equation of mathematics if the rightside has only 0. Also, you have no math equation if the rightside is a negative number. Also, no equation exists if the rightside is a imaginary number.

The only time you have an equation in mathematics, is when the rightside has a positive, nonzero Decimal Grid Number, all alone by itself. Then you have a math equation that you can work with.

Makes sense in logic, makes sense in physics, that you need some true physical reality on one side of a equation, a balancing beam, and then measure that physical reality by weights or numbers of math on the other side of the equation.

This book is the history of my discovery of the famous Algebra Axiom of Equations of Math.

Cover Picture: an equation is the same as a balancing beam, and you have no equation if you have nothing on the rightside.


Product details
File Size: 1110 KB
Print Length: 36 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: July 24, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07VRVBD91
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

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


#11-4, 73rd published book

Chess Optimal Strategy OS: once and for always // Math focus series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 22-Oct2022, and this is my 73rd published book on science.

Preface: I am happy to announce I finally conquered chess, with solving of its optimal strategy OS, and it is a draw if both players play by the OS. This victory of solving happened on 6 December 2019, as seen below. And then a cheating row broke out in the chess world in late 2022 between Magnus Carlsen and Hans Niemann; accusations of hidden electronics. For which AP sees as the death-knell of chess tournaments of the long time play action and the only worthwhile chess tournaments now are that of speed chess, exclusively speed chess. And the new research into Chess is whether humans are better at Speed Chess than ever can a computer be at speed-chess.

Cover Picture is my favorite chess set because it is magnetic and because the squares are black and white, not a circus of different colors. Somehow my psychological mind is disturbed if the set is green and white, or red and black, really repulsive. But so be it, in a world, even esthetics, to me, has to be logical.


Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B082GS2HW3
Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 7, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 994 KB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 259 pages
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #329,786 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#692 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
#143 in Chess (Kindle Store)
#489 in Chess (Books)

#11-5, My 107th published book.

History of 4 Arithmetic-Algebra Axioms// History of why negative-numbers never exist// Math Focus series, book 5
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Last revision was 22Jun2021. This was AP's 107th published book on science.

Preface: This is somewhat a history book of math on the subject of arithmetic axioms for which Old Math failed miserably. And their failure cost math, centuries and even millennium of fake math in algebra. So costly was that failure that many minds in mathematics wasted their entire career in mathematics. The peak of stupidity of mathematics in not recognizing these three axioms of Arithmetic-Algebra, that peak of silliness ends with the ever-unprovable Riemann Hypothesis and why that conjecture is a failure of mathematics. I needed to write a entire whole book on just this topic for it affects both math and science in large part. To emphasize how critically important it is to have the primal axioms of arithmetic-algebra in logical order and correctness.

Cover Picture: The 10 Decimal Grid Numbers Coordinate System, all in 1st Quadrant Only for math has no negative numbers. And Descartes started the Coordinate System in 1637, as 1st Quadrant Only, with only one axis, not even two axes.

Product details
File Size: 1151 KB
Print Length: 56 pages
Publication Date: April 1, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B086QBY5TT
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

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

#11-6, 108th published book

New Math's FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF ALGEBRA// Math focus series, book 6

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Old Math had a Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, abbreviated as FTA, only big problem was, they forgot two critically important axioms of arithmetic for they forgot the subtraction axiom and the "what is a valid equation of mathematics axiom". When you are missing these vital important axioms of arithmetic and mathematics and try to assemble a Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, there is no hope in the world that your FTA is going to be correct without those axioms.

This book is what the true Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, FTA is an what it looks like. This book follows the previous book of this series: Arithmetic-Algebra Axioms// History of why negative-numbers never exist// Math Focus series, book 5. That prior book went into details of 3 axioms that Old Math either missed or severely neglected. For even the idea of having in Old Math the zero alone on the rightside of an equation for a polynomial runs into danger with the axiom of -- no division by zero. For when you demand all valid equations of mathematics have a nonzero positive decimal Grid number all alone by itself on the rightside of the equation. You can thence divide the entire Polynomial equation by that positive nonzero decimal Grid Number and hence, reduce every polynomial in existence to be a equation with 1 on the rightside of the equation, all alone. You cannot do that in a stupid Old Math program of focusing on zero as all alone on the rightside of the equation, which only goes to show, people in Old Math had no brain for reasoning, for they built their polynomial theory on zero, and forgot about a vital axiom that you cannot divide by zero, and you cannot reduce all polynomials to equal 1. People in Old Math went to school and learned the 4 R's-- reading, writing, arithmetic, remember (memorization), but never learned the 5th R-- reasoning.

Cover Picture is a Quintic, a 5th degree polynomial that opened up the case of FTA and what its proof looks like. Photograph picture on my lawn of 5APR2020, for I do so much adore Springtime and green plants. It revitalizes the soul to see plants spring back to life. My Rock Elm are producing seeds and my blackberries soon will explode in growth.


Product details
File Size: 848 KB
Print Length: 47 pages
Publication Date: April 5, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B086SPBM7F
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

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

#11-7, 110th published book

World's First One Variable Periodic Functions; utilizing Polynomials such as x^3 -6x^2 +11x = 6 // Math focus series, book 7
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

While working on the true Fundamental Theorem of Algebra, I ran across amazingly beautiful polynomials that offer science and physics periodic functions of one variable. This is a first in physics and science where we have periodic functions and not be sine or cosine or a trigonometry function, but rather instead a simple polynomial. This is a huge huge revolution in physics and mathematics both for polynomials are the easiest functions to do the calculus upon. For it means we can dismiss and dispel trigonometry functions as periodic and replace all periodic functions with polynomial functions.

Cover Picture is my iphone photograph of one of these remarkable periodic polynomial functions showing a plot of F(x) = x^3 -6x^2 + 11x. I labeled the minor trough keeping in mind that (0,0) is the major trough. If we plot a quartic periodic polynomial, a 4th degree periodic polynomial such as (x-1)(x-2)(x-3)(x-4) we have more up and down wavelets. Plot the 5th degree periodic polynomial (x-1)(x-2)(x-3)(x-4)(x-5) we have even more up and down smooth wavelets.


Product details
File Size: 902 KB
Print Length: 23 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B086Z93X71
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 


#11-8, 111th published book

WHY DID OLD MATH fail on the Divisional-Reverse, for they surely had Multiplicative-Inverse but too stupid to have Divisional Reverse // Math focus series, book 8
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)


Funny how the mind seems to converge and focus on a topic that was referred to in other topics ongoing and very much unrelated. For instance in February 2020 I wanted to include Scientific Notation to the common core standards of writing out a number in decimals, as seen in the cover picture of this book. Then in the months of March and April 2020, I was working on dragonflies of the Devonian geological period and needed to know the mass of Earth back in Devonian, which connected me to a number in mathematics called the Divisional-reverse. Then in April, I was doing the physics constants of Planck, Fine-Structure constant and the speed of light constant and for me to solve them again required the Divisional-reverse. So I had a confluence of research topics all needing a mathematical tool called the Divisional-reverse. This book is devoted to that tool of mathematics.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a Google search for 5th grade common core standards of what is taught in school about writing out decimal numbers.

Product details
File Size: 1095 KB
Print Length: 56 pages
Publication Date: April 14, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B08742MBLL
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

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



#11-9, 126th published book

Fourier Transform theory overhauled and replaced by Cycloid & Parabola Periodic Polynomials, Math focus series, book 9
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)


Last revision was 18Jan2022. And this is AP's 126th published book of science.
Preface: All functions, true functions of mathematics are polynomials. Anything that is not a polynomial has to be converted into a polynomial before it can be called and treated as a function. This book is the work book of converting all non-polynomials into being transformed into a polynomial and thus a function of mathematics.
Cover Picture: My iphone photograph of a Google search for "cycloid".

Product details
ASIN : B08D5NGQSP
Publication date : July 15, 2020
Language : English
File size : 1109 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 64 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #167,200 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #16 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #136 in Calculus (Books)


#11-10, 182nd published book

The Structure and Theory behind Mathematical Induction, and why it works// Math focus
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)


Preface: Shedding new light on Mathematical Induction method of proof. Simplifying and making the method easier. I debated whether to put this in logic science or math science. Finally chose math focus, even though Mathematical Induction has tones of rising above mathematics itself, like a piece of meta-math, even a hint of philosophy. But no, Mathematical Induction is down to earth mathematics.
And the cause of this book was my prior book on showing that the torus volume was related to the donut hole of that specific torus, related by the golden ratio number phi = 1.61.... and all its variants. My proof of that relationship was a proof by Mathematical Induction. And in so doing that proof, I saw I needed to fill in huge gaps and holes in Old Math and its Mathematical Induction. For the Mathematical Induction presented in this book, overpowers Old Math's Mathematical Induction. Far more easy, far more comprehensible, far easier to understand, and to apply.
Cover Picture: Is the full Decimal 10 Grid Number System and next to it is a partial listing of the 100 Grid. One can easily see that the 10 Grid is inside the 100 Grid and any further larger Grid System contains all the lower grid systems. So this is Mathematical Induction of the very existence of numbers themselves.



Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09XX7DTC9
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ April 13, 2022
• 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 ‏ : ‎ 75 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled



#11-11, My 200th published book of science.

Primes are ILL defined in Mathematics // Math focus
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: AP's 200th book of science// Primes are ILL defined in Mathematics // Math focus by Archimedes Plutonium.

A shame that Galois invented Groups, Ring,Field over the nonsense of quintic. But by 1830 in math history, it was not known that a Well Defined Equation of math had to have a positive nonzero number to the rightside of the equation at all times, and never be zero. Because the moment you do that, there never arises a problem of quintic.

And what Galois should have done with his time, was reason that groups rings and fields need to be invented for the purpose of a Well Defined Operator in mathematics.

It should not be AP that corrects all of Algebra of mathematics, but it should have been Galois or Gauss or Riemann to have done that by 1830.

Prime concept is a hallucination of Old Math. Ask any physicist where does the concept of prime arise in physics? It never does, and the reason being is mathematicians are kooks in defining prime.

Sure, mathematicians have known for centuries that primes have No Pattern, have No Formula. But you would then expect at least one marble of brain power from these mathematicians to notice that if No Pattern, No Formula, that something is wrong with the definition of primes.

What is wrong in the definition? It is simple and tells us why primes have no pattern, have no formula. To be Well Defined Operator, a operator must obey N#M = P where # is the operator (in our case, division) and N,M,P must be Counting Numbers to be well defined. So in other words a Well Defined operator over a set of numbers, must deliver to you when you operate N#M, must deliver to you another Counting Number P. Primes of Old Math only sometimes obeys that axiom of well defined. And, immediately we have numbers outside of Counting Numbers such as 1/2, 1/3, 2/3, etc etc.

Cover Picture: Is my photograph of my hand written formula of Well Defined Operator N # M = P. The N,M,P represent numbers from a given set. The symbol # represents the operator. A operator is well defined if all N,M,P are inside the given set. The operator is ILL defined if some P are not inside the original set.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BB6PWW2B
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 18, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 384 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 64 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled


#11-12, 228th published book

Brief History of *True Calculus*--including new integration methods / math focus

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Last revision was March 2023. And this is AP's 228th published book of science.

Preface: AP as a teenager had a wish at University in 1969-- to make all of calculus as easy as the Power Rules over polynomial functions. And by 2015, AP's wish came true. For calculus really is easy math, as easy as add, subtract, multiply and divide. But only when people see the light of day about calculus. And where math professors stop chasing fame and fortune in publishing nonsense and spend more time teaching better in classrooms and making calculus be easy.

The history of True Calculus is far different from that which is written in math history books. True Calculus requires a true valid geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, which none was ever given until 2015. Once a geometry proof of FTC arrived, can we write a true history of calculus. The Old Math history of calculus is filled with error and fake science such as the "limit concept", the concept of "continuity". And where Old Math never even had a proper well defined "function" concept. No wonder Old Math history of calculus is trash. AP provides a brief history of True Calculus. But while studying this subject, AP has new insights into the right-circular-cone. And a new method of integration of varying sized circles over a distance length.


Cover Picture: My iphone photograph of a Wikipedia entry of Cavalieri quadrature formula (area formula) that was so critical in Calculus history for it is the formula of integrals under the function graph curve for polynomial functions. Cavalieri's discovery of the Power Rule for integrals marks the beginning of modern day calculus.



Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BXJ4RRZR
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 4, 2023
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 646 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 ‏ : ‎ 50 pages


#11-13, 233rd published book


Utter garbage of Cantor's work on infinity especially the diagonal method// math focus
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: So much of the Usenet newsgroup sci.math are discussions concerning why 0.9999... should equal 1 or about infinity and specifically Cantor's work with his diagonal method. I thought the time is ripe for me to write a independent book on why and how Cantor was wrong, and to lay the subject to rest. For the flaws of logical reasoning in infinity discussions are really abominable and abysmal and deserves an entire book of clarity packed with simple reasoning.

It amazes me how resembling is the science of geography with borderlines makes clear what countries there are, yet the borderline concept was so foreign to all mathematicians until AP discovered the infinity borderline starting 2009.


Cover Picture: My iphone photograph of two world globes showing countries with borderlines. Borderlines are beacons of clarity from one concept as it transitions into a newer concept.


Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BZLZ9WY1
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 24, 2023
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 743 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 ‏ : ‎ 40 pages


#11-14, 160th published book

MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

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
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1155 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 70 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled




y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

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


AP kindly asks Google to let AP run all three, sci.math, sci.physics, PAU as he runs PAU, now--- all pure science, no spam and no govt b.s.

PAU newsgroup is this.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium

Math professors with few marbles of brain power to reason-- the Equation of math can never have a zero all alone on the rightside of the equation-- thus all of Galois Group Ring Field theory is phony baloney and a waste of time in College classrooms
Archimedes Plutonium
2024-02-20 06:18:46 UTC
Permalink
AP's 278th book of science starts a series on Experiments of Science that need a Logic- OverView of mistakes, grave errors and simple stupidity of reasoning starting with Magnetism.
33m views
Subscribe

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 6:03:00 PM (2 days ago)

AP's 278-289th books of science on correcting and chronicling famous experiments of science. I
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 6:17:45 PM (2 days ago)

I was fed up with the Old Physics, Old Chemistry community of do-nothing error filled professors who
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 7:37:58 PM (2 days ago)

The Chronicling list keeps going and hopefully I will not forget any important experiment in the next
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 8:09:07 PM (2 days ago)

On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 7:37:58 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: The Chronicling list
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 9:21:31 PM (2 days ago)

List keeps growing, but nothing is more important to science than Experiment, experiment and more
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 10:30:54 PM (2 days ago)

On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 9:21:31 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: List keeps growing,
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Feb 17, 2024, 11:00:02 PM (2 days ago)

Chronology Ancient Greek magnetism-- Lodestone. And also considering a new form of magnetism in
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 18, 2024, 3:03:38 AM (2 days ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
The list keeps growing bigger. I need my new insights into what superconductivity actually is, and it comes directly out of the Faraday law of Maxwell Equations which Feynman talked about the conundrum of 2 phenomenon. Where I get the sine of an angle of thrust. If the sine is that of 90 degrees I have the full current with no resistance as superconductivity. In other words, the pencil ellipse becomes straightline perpendicularity allowing for superconductivity. This is really really exciting for it also is the most beautiful explanation of the 4 seasons, why we have winter cold and summer hot and in between. All due to sine of angle that the Sun rays hit Earth. We can demonstrate this easily in front of a heater. If I hold me hand perpendicular, the most heat is felt. If I hold my hand at an angle only a fraction of the heat is felt. If I hold my hand on edge to the heater almost no heat is felt.

In this series of books I need to outline what Fallacy of Logic the mistakes that were made. For instance the fallacy of logic for the mistakes on the Faraday law is that the Maxwell Equations should all come from New Ohm's law, all four laws coming out of New Ohm's law and not each made up helter skelter. See AP's Teaching True Physics.


On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 11:00:02 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Chronology

Ancient Greek magnetism-- Lodestone. And also considering a new form of magnetism in recent news.

Ben Franklin kite flying in lightning storm 1700s

Jan Deiman- Adrian van Troostwijk, 1778 water electrolysis. Here I should include the history that two of the most famous scientists did water electrolysis-- Davy and Faraday, but both can be excused because a weighing scale of the accuracy needed was never available in the early 1800s to weigh the masses of hydrogen to oxygen. It is after precision scales were made that chemists and physicists became fools and derelict of duty.


Cavendish Gravity Constant experiment 1798.

Double Slit Experiment 1801 with Thomas Young.

Ohm's law 1827.



1845-1860s Neumann- Maxwell the formal math laws of Faraday magnetic induction to produce electricity from thrusting magnetic field.

Two phenomena
Faraday's law is a single equation describing two different phenomena: the motional emf generated by a magnetic force on a moving wire (see the Lorentz force), and the transformer emf generated by an electric force due to a changing magnetic field (described by the Maxwell–Faraday equation).
James Clerk Maxwell drew attention to this fact in his 1861 paper On Physical Lines of Force. In the latter half of Part II of that paper, Maxwell gives a separate physical explanation for each of the two phenomena.
A reference to these two aspects of electromagnetic induction is made in some modern textbooks. As Richard Feynman states:
So the "flux rule" that the emf in a circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the circuit applies whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the circuit moves (or both) ...
Yet in our explanation of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases – v × B for "circuit moves" and ∇ × E = −∂tB for "field changes".
We know of no other place in physics where such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena.
— Richard P. Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 18, 2024, 5:18:31 PM (2 days ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe

Alright, I need to make a Experiment myself, a world class experiment probably far more important than any on those long list below. The experiment involves heat and Light Waves and electricity and magnetism and why we have winter and summer. We are taught this lesson in Junior High School science but taught sloppily, never well enough that we can remember the cause of winter. For the complexity of the science involved makes teaching this subject difficult.

And it is this complexity of science that has evaded our understanding of Superconductivity. For if we analyzed how Sun Light Waves heat Earth, we can understand how superconductivity happens and why it exists. But first--- the full explanation of Winter.

We know from Junior High School that the tilt on axis of Earth is the cause of the 4 seasons, but we rarely are taught the particular details of how this occurs. So I want to make a Experimental Model.

And several Models.

The first model is on a cold wintry day, you have a space heater-- a warm electric heater with grill fins in between and you put your hands between the fins to instantly warm them. Now you have your hand and fingers perpendicular to the grill fins to get the most heat. But now you tilt your fingers and hands and you feel less and less heat.

Now we shift to the AP Model Experiment of the entire Globe of Earth and we use a package of new pencils, of 4 by 4 or 16 pencils in all in a plastic package. We pretend each pencil is a Light Wave from the Sun as heat. Now if those 16 pencils hits directly overhead on Earth would maximize density of 16 and that spot on Earth would be the hottest that day. But now those same 16 heading for a northern latitude on Earth in Winter has to contend with the curvature of Earth itself, but also has to contend with a axis tilt of Earth by 23 degrees. So we have a multitude of variables that we cannot use a simple math of a trigonometry function.

So on the Equator, all 16 pencil tips would hit the Equator with maximum density and all impacts would impart their total energy in the form of heat, and the Equator is really hot in this direct hit. But the polar region in winter, of those 16 pencils as Sun heat Light Waves, how many impact directly? How many impact at an angle?

Hard to believe, but the explanation of why summer and winter is this analysis but also; how Superconductivity works.

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 18, 2024, 10:11:33 PM (2 days ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
AP's Model of why Earth has Winters and Summers, due to Earth as sphere and tilt of axis 23 degrees.

So I get out the box of 16 pencils and pretend they are Sun Light Waves each. When they strike land in the tropics they come in packed maximum density 4 by 4 for a surface area of 16. Now when those same 16 Light Waves strike the Polar Region because the surface of Earth is curved, the curvature of Earth, plus the tilt in axis in winter of 23 degrees we have a different situation where the 16 light waves are spread out and hit Earth in a area of 16 by 16 = 256.

Now let us do this Model in Celsius. A typical tropical temperature would be 25 Celcius. So we have a ratio of this.

256 25Celsius
------- ---------------
16 XCelsius

Solving the ratio we have 256X = 400 Celsius
X the polar temperature is thus 400/256 = 1.5 Celsius, just shy of water freezing.

A similar model relates to the Faraday law as we thrust a bar magnet through a coil. But what if the bar magnet is at a slant to the coil perpendicular? Then we have to factor a fractional electric current production.

Now how does this relate to superconductivity? We see in a capacitor or battery as holding static electric current because the plates are perpendicular to the current held. If we short circuit the battery, all the current rushes out with superconduction, and no loss of electricity. If the capacitor or battery are not perfectly perpendicular then the current inside gradually wear away as internal heat. The cold temperatures needed to create superconductivity is to make all the plates perpendicular. For as the electricity is moving around inside the capacitor or battery it needs to keep hitting the walls perpendicular. Back to the Model, by perpendicular hitting of the walls or bouncing off the walls, all 16 of the Light Waves or electric current monopoles hit the walls as a maximum density of 16, none are thinned out into 256. (Sort of reminds me of Snell's law that the bent light means resistance and loss of electric current.)

More later.....

AP, King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 19, 2024, 1:33:41 AM (23 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Superconductivity is much like Snell's law of optics, only with angle of incidence equals angle of reflection of a 90 degree angle in, and 90 degree angle out. Like a mirror reflection where none of the electric waves get absorbed while inside the capacitor or battery. Where roundness is turning into straightline geometry of rectangles. As the waves of electric current keep reflecting off the walls at 90 degrees.

In fact the Snell's law of Old Physics is rather a waste of time to study for although we can see the rays moving in and out of a block of glass to air and vice versa, where Snell's law is really important is Sun Light Waves striking Earth and how much of those waves warm Earth, and how magnetic lines of force in bar magnet thrust through coil in Faraday law goes to making electric current, or how much a battery can store electric current by having the electricity strike the parallel plates at 90 degrees where they are reflected back with no resistance.

So superconductivity is the most important phenomenon of Light Waves striking at 90 degrees in Snell's law. Much like the image in a mirror is 90 degree reflections, energy in equals energy out.

My 270th book of science talks of superconductivity and its prevalence in biology. However I never made a mathematical formula in that book, and hope to by discussing this topic now.

--- quoting my 270th book of science ---


2nd Law of Thermodynamics is connected to Superconductivity-- Explained as New Ohm's Law// Physics research

by Archimedes Plutonium


Preface: When I went to college 1968-72 and studied physics and math, I learned thermodynamics as a major branch of physics. It was only recently in 2023-24 that I began to see a different picture of thermodynamics. That every major band width of the Electromagnetic Spectrum, radio, microwave, infrared, visible light, ultraviolet, soft x-rays, hard x-rays, gamma rays, did the realization come to me that thermodynamics is merely a detailed study of one of those band widths-- infrared band of the EM Spectrum. Up until now, I had thought thermodynamics was a physics study that stood out from other branches of physics. But no, thermodynamics is a minor part of the EM Spectrum. And as much as thermodynamics enjoys its status as a major branch of physics, we must realize, that radio wave band is another branch just as important as thermodynamics infrared band. And the other bands -- microwave, visible, ultraviolet, soft and hard x-rays, gamma rays all should have a branch of physics study as does thermodynamics infrared band.

Cover picture: Is my iphone photograph of a Google search for "Right-Hand-Rule" which very much defines the New Ohm's Law and 2nd law of thermodynamics and expresses the meaning of vector dot product and vector cross product.


Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 19, 2024, 4:36:34 PM (8 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
The mathematical law governing superconductivity is a extremely simple law, one of the most simple in all of physics, perhaps the rock-bottom most simple law of physics-- Snell's law, the law of reflection.

angle theta_1 equals angle theta_2 Law of Reflection

index_1* sine angle theta_1 = index_2* sine angle theta_2 Law of Refraction

When I learned Snell's law in High School Physics, my reaction in my mind was that of "what is all the fuss about"?

When I went to University a year or two later and seeing Snell's law again, my reaction was again-- "And this is a law of physics, seems like it has no meat on its bones, unlike gravity or Coulomb law."

And now I understand why Snell's law is impoverished of meaning, impoverished of depth and meaning. For it is not the full law until you recognize it is missing Superconductivity.

Superconductivity is inside of Snell's laws of Optics, where the sine angle is 90 degrees or its inverse 0 degrees for cosine angle and both come to a value of 1. All the electricity inside a battery or capacitor is released and no electricity is lost to resistance when you multiply by 1.

--- quoting excerpts from a recent book I wrote, my 271st book of science ---
Recalibrating physics units to one another, Calculus derivative, velocity, New Ohm's law // physics-math

by Archimedes Plutonium

Preface: A mystery paradox exists between math calculus and physics, in that math has just 3 dimensions for its maximum geometry description-- which is volume, yet physics maximum description of energy as in kinetic energy has just 2 dimensions of mass times meters^2/seconds^2. This is a paradox if left unresolved. This book aims to solve the mystery so that both physics energy and math volume are both 3rd dimension. And what results in this mystery solving is a recalibration of all the units of physics.


Cover Picture: My photograph of several important Physics units of Linear momentum and its derivative with respect to time is Force, while Angular momentum derivative with respect to time is Energy. Notice especially in this photograph of a computer screen at an angle. For I am able to get what looks like a graphing of what a graph paper looks like. So is this natural in physics optics to be able to retrieve a Graphing Grid System?

Here we are asking what is (B*E) to equal kg*meter^2 /sec^2. Since vector dot product is the same as vector cross product, only difference is where we take the angle, whether cosine or sine of a triangle to get area of two equal triangles that forms a parallelogram.

The direction AP is headed for is to make equal the ultimate units of 3D in geometry is volume making the ultimate units of volts in physics also be 3D.

That unification of volume to voltage requires Volts = current*(B*E) as similar to Volume = Length * Width * Depth.

The way I do that in this book is consider volume as a length of area, the area is width* depth and multiplied by length is volume. For physics, B*E is similar to width*depth and when multiplied the B*E is a parallelogram whose area is two triangles that compose the parallelogram. The area of one of these two triangles follows the formula Area = A cross B (sine angle) while the other complimentary triangle follows Area = A dot B (cosine of compliment angle of sine). So if the sine angle is 30 degrees the compliment angle is 60 degrees for cosine.

What I am heading for is the final units formula of Voltage is Volt = A*(magnetic field * electric field) written as A ((1/A)(meters/sec) * (A)(meters/sec). Which leaves me with Voltage = A(meters^2/seconds^2) a final configuration of energy.

In Geometry, volume is 3D and is the final configuration. In physics we need to end at 3D and be energy, and Voltage = A(meters^2/seconds^2 does just that.

But in New Physics, I need to recalibrate Ampere A and Coulomb C so that this final configuration makes sense.
--- end quoting from my 271st book of science ---

AP, King of Science

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 19, 2024, 7:44:51 PM (4 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
Alright I am able to start writing this book the first of a long series of books on Science Experiments and their failures of Logical interpretation and Logical Correctness. I was momentarily stalled because of the issue of a Math Formula for Superconductivity emerged early on. But now I start writing the first of this series.

I am fortunate to find the Math formula that involves Superconductivity while doing this series. And I am sure many new ideas will also pop up in writing this series which may be ten or more books long.

And in doing Superconductivity I found a way of explaining to the young student the difference between electric current and electric field. I know when I was a young student in late 1960s I kept wrestling with what was electric field and electric current. And I was not the only one for my classmates also had this difficulty. By doing various experiments in this series, I can point out to the young reader what that difference is quite clearly and save him/her the agony and turmoil of not knowing.

This series is about the impact and intersection of the science of Logic with the physical sciences-- mostly physics. And it harps back to a long problem that AP has voiced over the Internet sci.math, sci.physics and his own newsgroup of plutonium-atom-universe and in many of AP's published books of science. The obvious under-education of scientists who never took a single formal course in Logic in University. AP recommends a Introduction to Logic and then a full year of Symbolic Logic; thus 2 full years of training by all scientists in logic-- how to think straight and think clearly.

I truly believe if this had happened in physics education starting from Newton and Gilbert onwards-- that they studied Logic-- how to think straight and think clearly, that AP would not have to write a long series of books on how and why physicists- chemists, biologists failed so badly in their experiments and interpretation of their experiments and observations. For example, the 1908-1913 Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden gold leaf foil experiment with the conclusion of a "Atom has a dense small nucleus" would likely never occurred if the three had taken 2 years of logic in University. For all three Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden would have remembered that when cars hit head on with a truck and the cars fly backwards at twice the speed they struck the truck, would have made Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden declare the opposite--- Atoms have no nucleus, and that the incoming alpha particle rammed into a Muon, or muon cluster moving at nearly the speed of light in a opposite direction of incoming alpha particle. Much like the Newton cradle of balls swinging.

And this raises the question of Logic itself, is logic the subject of Clarity. We can call mathematics the subject of precision, but is Logic the subject of clarity?? Both Logic and Mathematics are languages needed by physics. Is clarity the same as precision? So many questions to tackle and wrestle with. So let me start writing the first of this series. My 278th book of science.

AP, King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 19, 2024, 9:37:49 PM (3 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
I am trying to find out when it was known of like poles --"deny same space occupancy"-- (some will think of it as repel.

I need to know when scientists fabricated their own magnets and no longer used lodestones.

From reading some history, apparently when you make steel and cool it, exposing to Earth magnetic field you manufactor a magnet. So did Maricourt in 1269 make his own magnet that he explored polarity, or was he still using lodestones.


--- quoting this excellent history summary of magnets by magnet-shop.com ---
Magnets throughout the history

magnetitThe history of magnets begins with the first discoveries of magnetic stones or lodestones – starting from 1845 this kind of stone was called magnetite. It is a mostly black mineral of iron and oxygen or iron hydroxide, which develops in a natural way by volcanic activity and has its own magnetic property. About 9600 sites of these magnetic stons are nowadays established.

The Greek philosopher Thales of Miletus had already noticed the special effects of the magnetic stones in the 6th century b.C. He wrote according to Aristotle that these stones have a soul because they can move and tighten iron. Such an invisible force corresponded for the ancient Greeks a feature of the psyche and inner liveliness.

The origin of the name
naturalishistoriaThe name is originally from the ancient Greek word "lithos magnes". The origin of the name comes as Pliny explained in his “Naturalis Historia” (77 a.D.) from the legend of the Greek shepherd Magnes on Mount Ida, his iron stock and the nails in his shoes were attracted by the magnetite stones.

But this word probably comes more from the countryside Magnesia (Magnisia) in Thessaly, a famous locality of the magnetic stones. That was declared by Lucretius in his “De Rerum Natura” didactic poem which has been released by Cicero after Lucretius died.

Other sources say the name was given by the city of Magnesia in Asia Minor a present-day region in Turkey. She was a colony of the Magnet Macedonian tribe.

The first compass pointed to the south
kompassThe special characteristics of the magnetite were not only known by the ancient Greeks, the properties of the magnets were also analyzed in China in the pre-Christian times. In the Warring States period Hanfuzius developed there the first compass ever. The “Si Nan”, which literally means the south pointer.

It consisted in a spoon shaped lodestone placed as a compass needle on a flat square bronze or copper plate in which symbols, lines and writings were engraved. The magnetic field of the spoon was aligned so that it pointed again to the south after each rotation. The south was the preferred direction of the Taoist trigrams. It was the direction of the sky, while the north was considered inauspicious.

Wet and dry compass
In Europe the first description of the use of compasses for navigation was given by Alexander Neckam. In his work “De Utensilibus et De Rerum Naturis” (both written in around 1190 a.D.) he described floating needles that were revolved in the water until they pointed to the north. The use of these needles gave the possibility to navigate in a complete darkness too.

On the contrary, Pierre de Maricourt mentioned for the first time a dry compass in his "Epistola de Magnete" written in 1269. He had free-swinging, dry magnetic needles, which rotated on a pin. They were the most important component of the dry compass. According to the legend the Italian Flavio Gioia from Amalfi was the first who invented this kind of compass. From the beginning of the 14th century this compass appeared in the combination with the compass rose on Western ships.

The two poles of magnets
Maricourt had systematically worked with magnets and their polarity and in his work dated 1269 he explained what he discovered: the same magnetic poles repel each other while different poles attract.

He wrote also that by breaking a magnet you get two small magnets. The explanation for this phenomenon was only found out pretty much later in the years. This is because of the natural rod shaped orientation of the elementary magnets in ferromagnetic materials.

The magnetization of ferromagnetic materials
This is why ferromagnetic materials can also be magnetized. This process was known early on. It happened by brushing some objects with a magnet. In this way, objects such as an iron nail or wire were lined in a parallel way to this magnet.

Such magnetization can be created again by shocks like by high temperatures or by oppositely polarized magnetic fields.

The Earth as magnet
For a long time nobody could find an explanation for the reason why magnetic needles orientate to the north or to the south. At the beginning it was thought that the magnets were attracted by the pole star.

Only William Gilbert came in his major work De magnets, Magnetisque Corporis et de Magno magnets Tellure (about magnets, magnetic bodies and the big magnet Earth), dating back to 1600, to the conclusion that the entire globe must be regarded as a giant magnet with two poles.

His own experiments were helped by a spherical magnet, the "Terrela", and the inclination of the magnetic needles and their different tilt to the poles depending on the latitude discovered by Georg Hartmann.

Magnetism and electricity
william_gilbert Gilbert had already employed magnetism with electricity, but only James Clerk Maxwell was the first one who put the relationships in the form of a system of differential equations together. After that the widespread hypothesis started in the first years of the 19th century of identity between electricity and magnetism was established. The Danish physicist Hans Christian Ørsted demonstrated the electromagnetic effect in 1820.

william_sturgeon In 1826 it was the Englishman William Sturgeon even succeeded as the first to invent an electromagnet. It consisted of a coil forming a magnetic field when current flows through. In the coil, there was an iron core, the magnetic field increased, and led. In this case, the magnetic field lines are concentrated in the interior of the coil, where the strongest magnetic flux density was found. Outside the coil it decreases quickly with bigger distance, we can also say that electromagnets have a big effect used on small distances.

james_clerk_maxwellWith his "Maxwell equations" described James Clark Maxwell, the behaviour of electric and magnetic fields and their interactions. He published in 1864 at London's Royal Society. In addition, Maxwell wrote about waves of oscillating electric and magnetic fields that move through empty space. Your speed he derived from electrical experiments.
--- end quoting from magnet-shop.com of their excellent summary of magnet history ---
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 19, 2024, 10:17:49 PM (2 hours ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
So I need to know what magnets Maricourt used? Did he use lodestone. Or did he have iron-smiths craft magnets of iron-nickel exposing them to lodestones and then heating the iron-nickel to a high temperature.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
Feb 19, 2024, 10:43:23 PM (1 hour ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 10:17:49 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
So I need to know what magnets Maricourt used? Did he use lodestone. Or did he have iron-smiths craft magnets of iron-nickel exposing them to lodestones and then heating the iron-nickel to a high temperature.

To find out what magnets Maricourt used I suspect compass needle development tells me Maricourt made iron rods as magnets.
--- quoting Wikipedia on compass ---
A magnetic rod is required when constructing a compass. This can be created by aligning an iron or steel rod with Earth's magnetic field and then tempering or striking it. However, this method produces only a weak magnet so other methods are preferred. For example, a magnetised rod can be created by repeatedly rubbing an iron rod with a magnetic lodestone. This magnetised rod (or magnetic needle) is then placed on a low friction surface to allow it to freely pivot to align itself with the magnetic field. It is then labeled so the user can distinguish the north-pointing from the south-pointing end; in modern convention the north end is typically marked in some way.
If a needle is rubbed on a lodestone or other magnet, the needle becomes magnetized. When it is inserted in a cork or piece of wood, and placed in a bowl of water it becomes a compass. Such devices were universally used as compass until the invention of the box-like compass with a 'dry' pivoting needle sometime around 1300.
--- end quoting Wikipedia ---
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<***@gmail.com>
12:10 AM (now)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 7:44:51 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

And this raises the question of Logic itself, is logic the subject of Clarity. We can call mathematics the subject of precision, but is Logic the subject of clarity?? Both Logic and Mathematics are languages needed by physics. Is clarity the same as precision? So many questions to tackle and wrestle with. So let me start writing the first of this series. My 278th book of science.

The mission of math is precision in quantity and geometry for physics and the other sciences. The mission of Logic is straightline reasoning does B follow from A and is it clear what A, and B are. In a sense, a proof of mathematics is the subject of Logic, not mathematics itself. Mathematics defines quantity and geometry, but it is logic that puts thoughts, ideas, into a sequence or series forming a proof.

All the more reason that mathematicians take 2 years of College Logic before becoming a mathematician.

AP is not going to argue or quibble over whether these science experiments are error filled or mistakes made of mathematics. AP is arguing in this series of books of Science Experiments whether the conclusions are warranted or whether mistakes in going from A to B in ideas is correct and proper. For example in the Millikan oil drop experiment to measure the force of electromagnetism, is compared to the force of gravity as the oil drop descends to achieve the number constant of 1.60*10^-19 Coulomb. So how was Millikan able to Logically know he had 1 unit and not more than 1 unit??

AP

AP kindly asks Google to let AP run all three, sci.math, sci.physics, PAU as he runs PAU, now--- all pure science, no spam and no govt b.s.

PAU newsgroup is this.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe        
Archimedes Plutonium

Loading...