Archimedes Plutonium
2024-02-12 11:23:42 UTC
#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
#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, 200th published book
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
#12-1, My 3rd published book
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
Product details
• ASIN : B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date : March 11, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 20 pages
• Lending : Enabled
•
•
Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 14May2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.
Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.
In the course of 2019 through 2022, I have had to explain this proof often on Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics. And one thing that constant explaining does for a mind of science, is reduce the proof to its stripped down minimum format, to bare bones skeleton proof. I can prove the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse in just a one sentence proof. Proof-- A single cone and oval have just one axis of symmetry, while a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, hence slant cut is always a oval, never the ellipse.
Product details
• ASIN : B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date : November 21, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 827 KB
• Simultaneous device usage : Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 51 pages
• Lending : Enabled
#12-2, My 11th published book
World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 15Dec2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
Preface:
Actually my title is too modest, for the proof that lies within this book makes it the World's First Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for in my modesty, I just wanted to emphasis that calculus was geometry and needed a geometry proof. Not being modest, there has never been a valid proof of FTC until AP's 2015 proof. This also implies that only a geometry proof of FTC constitutes a valid proof of FTC.
Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had a huge mass of mistakes, errors, fakes and con-artist trickery such as the "limit analysis". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.
To give a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus requires math be cleaned-up and cleaned-out of most of math's mistakes and errors. So in a sense, a Geometry FTC proof is a exercise in Consistency of all of Mathematics. In order to prove a FTC geometry proof, requires throwing out the error filled mess of Old Math. Can the Reals be the true numbers of mathematics if the Reals cannot deliver a Geometry proof of FTC? Can the functions that are not polynomial functions allow us to give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a Coordinate System in 2D have 4 quadrants and still give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a equation of mathematics with a number that is _not a positive decimal Grid Number_ all alone on the right side of the equation, at all times, allow us to give a Geometry proof of the FTC?
Cover Picture: Is my hand written, one page geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the world's first geometry proof of FTC, 2013-2015, by AP.
Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 154 pages
Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#134 in Calculus (Books)
#20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#12-3, My 24th published book
World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.
Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.
Product details
• ASIN : B07NMV8NQQ
• Publication date : March 20, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1241 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 60 pages
• Lending : Enabled
#12-4, My 28th published book
World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.
Cover picture: Shows four countries colored yellow, red, green, purple and all four are mutually adjacent. And where the Purple colored country is landlocked, so that if it were considered that a 5th color is needed, that 5th color should be purple, hence, 4 colors are sufficient.
Product details
ASIN : B07PZ2Y5RV
Publication date : March 23, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1183 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 34 pages
Lending : Enabled
#12-5, My 6th published book
World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 // Math proof series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Last revision was 29Apr2021. This is AP's 6th published book.
Preface: Truthful proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof.
Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019, I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.
Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.
As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).
Product details
• ASIN : B07PQKGW4M
• Publication date : March 12, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1503 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 156 pages
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,327,817 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #589 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
◦ #3,085 in Number Theory (Books)
#12-6, 19th published book
World's First Proof of Collatz Conjecture// Math proof series, book 6
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Last revision was 14May2022. This is AP's 19th published book.
Preface: Old Math's Collatz conjecture, 1937, was this: If you land on an even number, you divide by 2 until you come to an odd number. If you come to or land on an odd number, you do a 3N+1 then proceed further. The conjecture then says that no matter what number you start with, it ends up being 1.
What the Collatz proof of math tells us, is that so very often mathematicians pose a conjecture in which their initial formulation of the conjecture is murky, obfuscation and poorly designed statement. Such poorly designed statements can never be proven true or false. An example that comes to mind of another poorly designed conjecture is the No Odd Perfect Conjecture, in which the statement is obfuscation of factors. So for the odd number 9, is it 1+3, or is it 1+ 3 + 3. So when a mathematics conjecture is full of obfuscation and error in the statement, then these type of conjectures never have a proof. And takes a person with a logical mind to fix and straighten out the conjecture statement and then provide a proof, thereof.
A return to my Collatz proof in 2022, allowed me a second proof of Collatz with only 3N+1, in a mathematical induction proof, using the Decimal Grid System of Numbers. The true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid System Numbers and this allows a Collatz proof of stand alone 3N+1.
Cover picture: when I think of Collatz, I think of a slide, a slide down and so my French curve is the best slide I can think of, other than a slide-ruler, but a slide ruler is slide across.
Product details
• ASIN : B07PS98K5H
• Publication date : March 16, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1990 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 113 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #212,131 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #4 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #9 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
◦ #32 in Number Theory (Books)
#12-7, My 20th published book
World's First Proofs that No Perfect Cuboid Exists// Math proof series, book 7
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Someone on the Internet posed the unproven No Perfect Cuboid, and so I took up the challenge. I am usually a sucker for geometry riddles, more so than number theory. So I obliged. Then by 2014 I proved the matter and looking back at it now in 2019, I really really do not see what all the fuss was about-- that it was not that hard not hard at all. You just have to look carefully at sets of 4 right triangles and find an Impossibility Construction, why you cannot have those 4 right triangles all with positive integer numbers for their 3 sides. But the proof method is so hugely important in math-- impossibility of construction. And, please, do not confuse that method with Reductio Ad Absurdum, for RAA is not a valid proof method in mathematics (see my logic book on RAA). But, the method of Impossible Construction, although it might look like RAA, is totally different and fully valid in all aspects.
But now, in hindsight in March 2019, writing this up, I see a very close connection of No Perfect Cuboid to that of Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem with its equation of A^x + B^y = C^z and the way I proved Generalized FLT was with "condensed rectangles" and the No Perfect Cuboid is a 3rd Dimension object but it is 4 rectangles of 4 right triangles we inspect. And we can pursue that connection between Generalized FLT and No Perfect Cuboid further, but not now.
Cover Picture: Is that of 4 rectangular boxes, 2 of which are cubes sitting atop a book page of the Cubic Set for the Transuranium Atoms, from the textbook "The Elements Beyond Uranium" , Seaborg, Loveland, 1990. I am always looking for connections.
Product details
• ASIN : B07PMZQNNT
• Publication date : March 16, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1382 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 61 pages
• Lending : Enabled
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
Psychology_behind math professors seeing Quantum Mechanics is "discrete" yet math professor fools dug deeper and deeper into continuous and continuum Cohen.
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
#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, 200th published book
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
#12-1, My 3rd published book
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
Product details
• ASIN : B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date : March 11, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 20 pages
• Lending : Enabled
•
•
Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 14May2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.
Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than struggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a scientist ever wants to do is science itself. So all my new news and thoughts of Conic Sections is carried out in this 68th book of AP. And believe you me, I have plenty of new news.
In the course of 2019 through 2022, I have had to explain this proof often on Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics. And one thing that constant explaining does for a mind of science, is reduce the proof to its stripped down minimum format, to bare bones skeleton proof. I can prove the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse in just a one sentence proof. Proof-- A single cone and oval have just one axis of symmetry, while a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, hence slant cut is always a oval, never the ellipse.
Product details
• ASIN : B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date : November 21, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 827 KB
• Simultaneous device usage : Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 51 pages
• Lending : Enabled
#12-2, My 11th published book
World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 15Dec2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science.
Preface:
Actually my title is too modest, for the proof that lies within this book makes it the World's First Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for in my modesty, I just wanted to emphasis that calculus was geometry and needed a geometry proof. Not being modest, there has never been a valid proof of FTC until AP's 2015 proof. This also implies that only a geometry proof of FTC constitutes a valid proof of FTC.
Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had a huge mass of mistakes, errors, fakes and con-artist trickery such as the "limit analysis". And very surprising that most math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a proof. Yet that is what happened in the science of mathematics where they took an analysis and elevated it to the stature of being a proof, when it was never a proof.
To give a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus requires math be cleaned-up and cleaned-out of most of math's mistakes and errors. So in a sense, a Geometry FTC proof is a exercise in Consistency of all of Mathematics. In order to prove a FTC geometry proof, requires throwing out the error filled mess of Old Math. Can the Reals be the true numbers of mathematics if the Reals cannot deliver a Geometry proof of FTC? Can the functions that are not polynomial functions allow us to give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a Coordinate System in 2D have 4 quadrants and still give a Geometry proof of FTC? Can a equation of mathematics with a number that is _not a positive decimal Grid Number_ all alone on the right side of the equation, at all times, allow us to give a Geometry proof of the FTC?
Cover Picture: Is my hand written, one page geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the world's first geometry proof of FTC, 2013-2015, by AP.
Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 154 pages
Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#134 in Calculus (Books)
#20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#12-3, My 24th published book
World's First Proof of Kepler Packing Problem KPP // Math proof series, book 3
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
There has been a alleged proof of KPP by Thomas Hales, but his is a fakery because he does not define what infinity actually means, for it means a borderline between finite and infinite numbers. Thus, KPP was never going to be proven until a well-defined infinity borderline was addressed within the proof. And because infinity has a borderline means that in free space with no borderlines to tackle and contend with, the 12 kissing point density that is the hexagonal close packed is the maximum density. But the truth and reality of Kepler Packing is asking for maximum packing out to infinity. That means you have to contend and fight with the packing of identical spheres up against a wall or border. And so, in tackling that wall, we can shift the hexagonal closed pack to another type of packing, a hybrid type of packing in order to get "maximum packing". So no proof ever of KPP is going to happen unless the proof tackles a infinity border wall. In free-space, a far distance away from a wall barrier of infinity border, then, hexagonal closed pack reigns and is the packing in all of free space-- but, the moment the packing gets nearby the walls of infinity border, then, we re-arrange the hexagonal closed pack to fit in more spheres. Not unlike us packing a suitcase and then rearranging to fit in more.
Cover picture: is a container and so the closed packing must be modified once the border is nearly reached to maximize the number of spheres.
Product details
• ASIN : B07NMV8NQQ
• Publication date : March 20, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1241 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 60 pages
• Lending : Enabled
#12-4, My 28th published book
World's First Valid Proof of 4 Color Mapping Problem// Math proof series, book 4
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Now in the math literature it is alleged that Appel & Haken proved this conjecture that 4 colors are sufficient to color all planar maps such that no two adjacent countries have the same color. Appel & Haken's fake proof was a computer proof and it is fake because their method is Indirect Nonexistence method. Unfortunately in the time of Appel & Haken few in mathematics had a firm grip on true Logic, where they did not even know that Boole's logic is fakery with his 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that 3 AND 2 = 5 with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 depending on which is subtracted. But the grave error in logic of Appel & Haken is their use of a utterly fake method of proof-- indirect nonexistence (see my textbook on Reductio Ad Absurdum). Wiles with his alleged proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is another indirect nonexistence as well as Hales's fake proof of Kepler Packing is indirect nonexistence.
Appel & Haken were in a time period when computers used in mathematics was a novelty, and instead of focusing on whether their proof was sound, everyone was dazzled not with the logic argument but the fact of using computers to generate a proof. And of course big big money was attached to this event and so, math is stuck with a fake proof of 4-Color-Mapping. And so, AP starting in around 1993, eventually gives the World's first valid proof of 4-Color-Mapping. Sorry, no computer fanfare, but just strict logical and sound argument.
Cover picture: Shows four countries colored yellow, red, green, purple and all four are mutually adjacent. And where the Purple colored country is landlocked, so that if it were considered that a 5th color is needed, that 5th color should be purple, hence, 4 colors are sufficient.
Product details
ASIN : B07PZ2Y5RV
Publication date : March 23, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1183 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 34 pages
Lending : Enabled
#12-5, My 6th published book
World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 // Math proof series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Last revision was 29Apr2021. This is AP's 6th published book.
Preface: Truthful proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof.
Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019, I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.
Cover Picture: In my own handwriting, some Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem type of equations.
As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).
Product details
• ASIN : B07PQKGW4M
• Publication date : March 12, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1503 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 156 pages
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,327,817 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #589 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
◦ #3,085 in Number Theory (Books)
#12-6, 19th published book
World's First Proof of Collatz Conjecture// Math proof series, book 6
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Last revision was 14May2022. This is AP's 19th published book.
Preface: Old Math's Collatz conjecture, 1937, was this: If you land on an even number, you divide by 2 until you come to an odd number. If you come to or land on an odd number, you do a 3N+1 then proceed further. The conjecture then says that no matter what number you start with, it ends up being 1.
What the Collatz proof of math tells us, is that so very often mathematicians pose a conjecture in which their initial formulation of the conjecture is murky, obfuscation and poorly designed statement. Such poorly designed statements can never be proven true or false. An example that comes to mind of another poorly designed conjecture is the No Odd Perfect Conjecture, in which the statement is obfuscation of factors. So for the odd number 9, is it 1+3, or is it 1+ 3 + 3. So when a mathematics conjecture is full of obfuscation and error in the statement, then these type of conjectures never have a proof. And takes a person with a logical mind to fix and straighten out the conjecture statement and then provide a proof, thereof.
A return to my Collatz proof in 2022, allowed me a second proof of Collatz with only 3N+1, in a mathematical induction proof, using the Decimal Grid System of Numbers. The true numbers of mathematics are the Decimal Grid System Numbers and this allows a Collatz proof of stand alone 3N+1.
Cover picture: when I think of Collatz, I think of a slide, a slide down and so my French curve is the best slide I can think of, other than a slide-ruler, but a slide ruler is slide across.
Product details
• ASIN : B07PS98K5H
• Publication date : March 16, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1990 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 113 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #212,131 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #4 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #9 in Number Theory (Kindle Store)
◦ #32 in Number Theory (Books)
#12-7, My 20th published book
World's First Proofs that No Perfect Cuboid Exists// Math proof series, book 7
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Someone on the Internet posed the unproven No Perfect Cuboid, and so I took up the challenge. I am usually a sucker for geometry riddles, more so than number theory. So I obliged. Then by 2014 I proved the matter and looking back at it now in 2019, I really really do not see what all the fuss was about-- that it was not that hard not hard at all. You just have to look carefully at sets of 4 right triangles and find an Impossibility Construction, why you cannot have those 4 right triangles all with positive integer numbers for their 3 sides. But the proof method is so hugely important in math-- impossibility of construction. And, please, do not confuse that method with Reductio Ad Absurdum, for RAA is not a valid proof method in mathematics (see my logic book on RAA). But, the method of Impossible Construction, although it might look like RAA, is totally different and fully valid in all aspects.
But now, in hindsight in March 2019, writing this up, I see a very close connection of No Perfect Cuboid to that of Generalized Fermat's Last Theorem with its equation of A^x + B^y = C^z and the way I proved Generalized FLT was with "condensed rectangles" and the No Perfect Cuboid is a 3rd Dimension object but it is 4 rectangles of 4 right triangles we inspect. And we can pursue that connection between Generalized FLT and No Perfect Cuboid further, but not now.
Cover Picture: Is that of 4 rectangular boxes, 2 of which are cubes sitting atop a book page of the Cubic Set for the Transuranium Atoms, from the textbook "The Elements Beyond Uranium" , Seaborg, Loveland, 1990. I am always looking for connections.
Product details
• ASIN : B07PMZQNNT
• Publication date : March 16, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1382 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 61 pages
• Lending : Enabled
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
Psychology_behind math professors seeing Quantum Mechanics is "discrete" yet math professor fools dug deeper and deeper into continuous and continuum Cohen.