info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
**117th book by AP// Truth about the Double-Slit Experiment and the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment// Physics focus series, book 7 by Archimedes Plutonium
30 views
Skip to first unread message
Archimedes Plutonium
May 4, 2020, 12:04:36 PM5/4/20
to
Truth about the Double-Slit Experiment and the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment// Physics focus series, book 7
by Archimedes Plutonium
Preface: Was there hype and exaggeration and misunderstanding in the mysteries of the 20th century Quantum Mechanics, QM? Well yes of course, whenever you have many many discoveries all within 30 years of 1900 to 1930 you are bound to have quite a lot of hype, exaggeration and just plain poor logic and interpretation and evaluation of the experiments
by Archimedes Plutonium
Preface: Was there hype and exaggeration and misunderstanding in the mysteries of the 20th century Quantum Mechanics, QM? Well yes of course, whenever you have many many discoveries all within 30 years of 1900 to 1930 you are bound to have quite a lot of hype, exaggeration and just plain poor logic and interpretation and evaluation of the experiments
Archimedes Plutonium
May 4, 2020, 12:56:57 PM5/4/20
to
I never experienced this before in all my writing of science books, where I am held up by historical data-- when was it first possible to actually record the particle versus wave nature of light in a double slit.
I mean, what year was it that we could actually measure the photon count versus the interference pattern
I mean, what year was it that we could actually measure the photon count versus the interference pattern
Archimedes Plutonium
May 4, 2020, 2:08:56 PM5/4/20
to
On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 11:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> I never experienced this before in all my writing of science books, where I am held up by historical data-- when was it first possible to actually record the particle versus wave nature of light in a double slit.
>
> I mean, what year was it that we could actually measure the photon count versus the interference pattern
Actually, a true history of the Double Slit Experiment involves more of measuring the photons or waves, than anything else. The monitoring devices made the science.
> I never experienced this before in all my writing of science books, where I am held up by historical data-- when was it first possible to actually record the particle versus wave nature of light in a double slit.
>
> I mean, what year was it that we could actually measure the photon count versus the interference pattern
Archimedes Plutonium
May 4, 2020, 5:11:52 PM5/4/20
to
Am I correct in saying that with DG was the Double Slit Experiment on the top level for analysis.
AP
Michael Moroney
May 4, 2020, 6:25:47 PM5/4/20
to
>Kibo even failed comedy, let alone math and physics, yet tap dancing school in
>Boston was not fulfilling for the failure.
Oh no! Stupid Plutonium was doing about as well as could be expected for
quite some time, but now he has failed all at once! And he must be lonely after
a long South Dakota winter and now Covid so he couldn't repress his gayness!
Plutonium is once again trying to make sci.math and sci.physics into gay pickup
bars, and he's trolling for his 12 "crushes", hoping at least one of them will
respond favorably!
You're disgusting, Plutonium. These groups are for math and physics, not a
place for you to try to pick up gay math/science students! If you were really
interested in science, you'd donate your brain. Not in 20 years, DO IT. NOW.
No wonder the plutonium is the new SI unit of failure. You failed spectacularly
now!
>Boston was not fulfilling for the failure.
Oh no! Stupid Plutonium was doing about as well as could be expected for
quite some time, but now he has failed all at once! And he must be lonely after
a long South Dakota winter and now Covid so he couldn't repress his gayness!
Plutonium is once again trying to make sci.math and sci.physics into gay pickup
bars, and he's trolling for his 12 "crushes", hoping at least one of them will
respond favorably!
You're disgusting, Plutonium. These groups are for math and physics, not a
place for you to try to pick up gay math/science students! If you were really
interested in science, you'd donate your brain. Not in 20 years, DO IT. NOW.
No wonder the plutonium is the new SI unit of failure. You failed spectacularly
now!
Archimedes Plutonium
May 4, 2020, 7:30:10 PM5/4/20
to
Halliday & Resnick, Fundamentals of Physics, 3rd edition, 1988, page 922 on diffraction, especially page 924 talking about the Fresnel Bright Spot, a proof of the wave nature of light. But also giving a history of 1819 of Fresnel. Young came earlier with Double Slit of 1801, and then comes Fresnel of 1819.
But none of these experiments actually measures with accuracy both the wave nature and particle nature of light at the same time. For that we wait until Davisson-Germer Experiment 1923-1927.
What was around in 1923 that could accurately measure both wave and particle nature of light?
Feynman starts his 3rd volume on Quantum Mechanics in Feynman Lectures on Physics, 1965 with all about the Double Slit Experiment.
I wish that Feynman had talked about how QM achieved accuracy in measuring the wave and particle nature in the Double Slit Experiment. Was it the Davisson-Germer Experiment. What Feynman does talk about is "...an increasing confusion which was finally resolved in 1926 and 1927 by Schrodinger, Heisenberg, and Born."
--- Quoting Feynman, Feynman Lectures on Physics, 1-1, vol 3 ---
In this chapter we shall tackle immediately the basic element of the mysterious behavior in its most strange form. We choose to examine a phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery. We cannot make the mystery go away by "explaining" how it works. We will just tell you how it works. In telling you how it works we will have told you about the basic peculiarities of all quantum mechanics.
--- end quoting Feynman ---
Well, I have to stop there and say something about Feynman's paragraph. It is in error totally. Sad to say for Feynman was certainly one of my heros of physics, along with Dirac. But it is time to correct Feynman.
The heart of QM was not this Double Slit, but the simple fact that Reality is discrete and not a continuum. Planck and Planck's constant is the heart of quantum mechanics.
It is sad that Feynman did not live longer, for maybe he would have stumbled onto the idea that AP stumbled upon. The idea that a light wave is a light ray and which is shaped like a extension cord of electricity.
What I mean is that a light ray looks like a long closed loop that is looking like a single ray.
Think of a light ray as a extension cord-- its closed loop feature -- like this.
^
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
v
Old Physics and Feynman thought of a light ray as ^v^v^v^v^v^
That is not a closed loop.
But light ray is closed loop.
And when a light ray goes through a Double Slit as a closed loop, it delivers both a Wave Nature and a Particle Nature to measurement.
AP
But none of these experiments actually measures with accuracy both the wave nature and particle nature of light at the same time. For that we wait until Davisson-Germer Experiment 1923-1927.
What was around in 1923 that could accurately measure both wave and particle nature of light?
Feynman starts his 3rd volume on Quantum Mechanics in Feynman Lectures on Physics, 1965 with all about the Double Slit Experiment.
I wish that Feynman had talked about how QM achieved accuracy in measuring the wave and particle nature in the Double Slit Experiment. Was it the Davisson-Germer Experiment. What Feynman does talk about is "...an increasing confusion which was finally resolved in 1926 and 1927 by Schrodinger, Heisenberg, and Born."
--- Quoting Feynman, Feynman Lectures on Physics, 1-1, vol 3 ---
In this chapter we shall tackle immediately the basic element of the mysterious behavior in its most strange form. We choose to examine a phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery. We cannot make the mystery go away by "explaining" how it works. We will just tell you how it works. In telling you how it works we will have told you about the basic peculiarities of all quantum mechanics.
--- end quoting Feynman ---
Well, I have to stop there and say something about Feynman's paragraph. It is in error totally. Sad to say for Feynman was certainly one of my heros of physics, along with Dirac. But it is time to correct Feynman.
The heart of QM was not this Double Slit, but the simple fact that Reality is discrete and not a continuum. Planck and Planck's constant is the heart of quantum mechanics.
It is sad that Feynman did not live longer, for maybe he would have stumbled onto the idea that AP stumbled upon. The idea that a light wave is a light ray and which is shaped like a extension cord of electricity.
What I mean is that a light ray looks like a long closed loop that is looking like a single ray.
Think of a light ray as a extension cord-- its closed loop feature -- like this.
^
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
v
Old Physics and Feynman thought of a light ray as ^v^v^v^v^v^
That is not a closed loop.
But light ray is closed loop.
And when a light ray goes through a Double Slit as a closed loop, it delivers both a Wave Nature and a Particle Nature to measurement.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium
May 4, 2020, 8:08:24 PM5/4/20
to
So let me pick up some more on the idea that all of the Double Slit Experiment strangeness is solved and resolved by simply recognizing light wave as a thin closed loop ray, whose source is part of the closed loop.
Remember all the contradictory results of the Double Slit? How can a simple fact that the closed loop ray of Light dismiss all that contradictions?
Let me quote some more of Halliday & Resnick.
Halliday & Resnick, Fundamentals of Physics, 3rd edition, 1988, page 922 on diffraction.
--- Quoting ---
In Chapter 40 we defined diffraction rather loosely as the flaring out of light as it emerges from a narrow slit. Its main feature is: for a given wavelength, the narrower the slit, the more the flaring out. Figure 1 shows a narrow slit and the diffraction pattern formed when monochromatic light from a distant source falls on it. The incident light certainly "flares out" into the geometric shadow of the slit, but there is more to it than that.
--- end quote ---
AP writes: well, often in science it is far better to use several terms for a topic than the one word term itself. I mean, "flaring out" is far far more meaning of the phenomenon than the word "diffraction". But scientists like to have a single word for a topic even though its best name is "flaring out".
And I bring this to your attention in the case of a light ray being a closed loop, thin like a extension cord closed loop but rather straight as a line segment.
So when this light ray hits the slit, it is flared out, meaning it is a closed loop wave. And as this closed loop wave hits the screen, it is interference pattern, but if checking for particles, the closed loop of the light ray impacts the screen as if it were a particle.
So here we begin to see that all of the Double Slit Experiment mysteries were mysteries only because we were too dumb to realize light ray is a closed loop entity.
There are no mysteries to the Double Slit, once you realize the light ray is a closed loop ray.
AP
Remember all the contradictory results of the Double Slit? How can a simple fact that the closed loop ray of Light dismiss all that contradictions?
Let me quote some more of Halliday & Resnick.
Halliday & Resnick, Fundamentals of Physics, 3rd edition, 1988, page 922 on diffraction.
--- Quoting ---
In Chapter 40 we defined diffraction rather loosely as the flaring out of light as it emerges from a narrow slit. Its main feature is: for a given wavelength, the narrower the slit, the more the flaring out. Figure 1 shows a narrow slit and the diffraction pattern formed when monochromatic light from a distant source falls on it. The incident light certainly "flares out" into the geometric shadow of the slit, but there is more to it than that.
--- end quote ---
AP writes: well, often in science it is far better to use several terms for a topic than the one word term itself. I mean, "flaring out" is far far more meaning of the phenomenon than the word "diffraction". But scientists like to have a single word for a topic even though its best name is "flaring out".
And I bring this to your attention in the case of a light ray being a closed loop, thin like a extension cord closed loop but rather straight as a line segment.
So when this light ray hits the slit, it is flared out, meaning it is a closed loop wave. And as this closed loop wave hits the screen, it is interference pattern, but if checking for particles, the closed loop of the light ray impacts the screen as if it were a particle.
So here we begin to see that all of the Double Slit Experiment mysteries were mysteries only because we were too dumb to realize light ray is a closed loop entity.
There are no mysteries to the Double Slit, once you realize the light ray is a closed loop ray.
AP
Michael Moroney
May 4, 2020, 9:17:00 PM5/4/20
to
Me <franz.fri...@gmail.com> writes:
>On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 11:43:07 PM UTC+2, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> Why is he even here? Is it because the [he] uses sci.math and sci.physics as
>> a gay pick up bar??? Is that his only reason for ever posting here at all--
>> he wants to pick up a gay???
>Archie, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Plutonium is a textbook example of psychological projection. Look his responses
to other topics where someone insults him. He tries to redirect it to someone
completely uninvolved, usually some professor. For example, if someone posts:
Archimedes Plutonium is a rockhead.
he'll "quote" it by taking out his name in his response and direct it to some
random person. As in:
> is a rockhead.
AP writes: I don't think Professor Jones is a rockhead.
This is a little different as he attacks me, not "uninvolved" even though I was
leaving him alone because he seemed to finally learn to leave me alone. Somehow
he snapped, I wonder what iys really going on.
>On Monday, May 4, 2020 at 11:43:07 PM UTC+2, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> Why is he even here? Is it because the [he] uses sci.math and sci.physics as
>> a gay pick up bar??? Is that his only reason for ever posting here at all--
>> he wants to pick up a gay???
>Archie, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
Plutonium is a textbook example of psychological projection. Look his responses
to other topics where someone insults him. He tries to redirect it to someone
completely uninvolved, usually some professor. For example, if someone posts:
Archimedes Plutonium is a rockhead.
he'll "quote" it by taking out his name in his response and direct it to some
random person. As in:
> is a rockhead.
AP writes: I don't think Professor Jones is a rockhead.
This is a little different as he attacks me, not "uninvolved" even though I was
leaving him alone because he seemed to finally learn to leave me alone. Somehow
he snapped, I wonder what iys really going on.
Archimedes Plutonium
May 5, 2020, 1:25:47 AM5/5/20
to
Quoting Wikipedia—
In optics, the Arago spot, Poisson spot,[1][2] or Fresnel bright spot[3] is a bright point that appears at the center of a circular object's shadow due to Fresnel diffraction.[4][5][6][7] This spot played an important role in the discovery of the wave nature of light and is a common way to demonstrate that light behaves as a wave (for example, in undergraduate physics laboratory exercises).
In optics, the Arago spot, Poisson spot,[1][2] or Fresnel bright spot[3] is a bright point that appears at the center of a circular object's shadow due to Fresnel diffraction.[4][5][6][7] This spot played an important role in the discovery of the wave nature of light and is a common way to demonstrate that light behaves as a wave (for example, in undergraduate physics laboratory exercises).
Michael Moroney
May 5, 2020, 1:34:22 AM5/5/20
to
Math Failure Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> tarded:
Subject: Re: There are no mysteries to the Double Slit, once you realize the light ray is a closed loop ray
WARNING TO PARENTS: Archimedes Plutonium is offering to teach your children his
broken physics and math. BEWARE! He will corrupt the minds of your children! He
teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as the ellipse isn't a conic
section, that there are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine
wave isn't sinusoidal, plus many, many other instances of bad math and physics.
He has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books on Usenet.
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
on Kindle. This has greatly increased the danger to our students!
One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as 3 AND 2 = 5.
His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a false
statement that nobody believes, such as 3 OR 2 = 5, say that it is false (which
it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false statement
such as 3 AND 2 = 5, in order to really confuse future computer scientists. It
is important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let
Plutonium's bad logic confuse you!
Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like this. Perhaps
he is envious of their potential success, which he never had because he is a
failure at math and science. So perhaps he wants everyone to be a failure at
math and physics, just like he is. Perhaps he is an agent of China, in order
for them to dominate the trade economy. Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of
North Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new, true mathematics".
But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you his dangerous
books. Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise
legitimate Amazon.
In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of failure. You can
recognize the symbol of this evil pagan cult, which is an ascii-art cosmic
butthole.
Subject: Re: There are no mysteries to the Double Slit, once you realize the light ray is a closed loop ray
WARNING TO PARENTS: Archimedes Plutonium is offering to teach your children his
broken physics and math. BEWARE! He will corrupt the minds of your children! He
teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as the ellipse isn't a conic
section, that there are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine
wave isn't sinusoidal, plus many, many other instances of bad math and physics.
He has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books on Usenet.
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
on Kindle. This has greatly increased the danger to our students!
One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as 3 AND 2 = 5.
His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a false
statement that nobody believes, such as 3 OR 2 = 5, say that it is false (which
it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false statement
such as 3 AND 2 = 5, in order to really confuse future computer scientists. It
is important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let
Plutonium's bad logic confuse you!
Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like this. Perhaps
he is envious of their potential success, which he never had because he is a
failure at math and science. So perhaps he wants everyone to be a failure at
math and physics, just like he is. Perhaps he is an agent of China, in order
for them to dominate the trade economy. Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of
North Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new, true mathematics".
But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you his dangerous
books. Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise
legitimate Amazon.
In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of failure. You can
recognize the symbol of this evil pagan cult, which is an ascii-art cosmic
butthole.
Archimedes Plutonium
May 5, 2020, 1:51:25 AM5/5/20
to
On Tuesday, May 5, 2020 at 12:25:47 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Quoting Wikipedia—
> In optics, the Arago spot, Poisson spot,[1][2] or Fresnel bright spot[3] is a bright point that appears at the center of a circular object's shadow due to Fresnel diffraction.[4][5][6][7] This spot played an important role in the discovery of the wave nature of light and is a common way to demonstrate that light behaves as a wave (for example, in undergraduate physics laboratory exercises).
Summary for Solution of Double Slit: when you accept light ray as a closed loop straight line segment, then diffraction at a slit, whether single or double slit is a Flaring Out of the closed loop rays, they flare out and this flaring out of all the light rays causes a interference pattern on the screen. But also, as each flared out light wave hits the screen, because it is a closed loop ray, the light causes an impact onto the screen and we measure that impact as a particle hitting the screen. When you have a closed loop light ray, it entails both particle and wave simultaneously.
> Quoting Wikipedia—
> In optics, the Arago spot, Poisson spot,[1][2] or Fresnel bright spot[3] is a bright point that appears at the center of a circular object's shadow due to Fresnel diffraction.[4][5][6][7] This spot played an important role in the discovery of the wave nature of light and is a common way to demonstrate that light behaves as a wave (for example, in undergraduate physics laboratory exercises).
Archimedes Plutonium
May 5, 2020, 3:35:36 PM5/5/20
to
Moving on to the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment. I remember the solenoid from a car. A solenoid is needed to carry strong heavy current, such as 100 amps in starter. So you want to deliver this heavy current but a hand switch is not able to deal with such a heavy current, so a solenoid is built into the starter. The solenoid is a coil wound around a core with two heavy bar contacts so as the solenoid is magnetized the contacts fall into place and deliver the 100 amps. That is my memory of solenoid.
In the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment, we place a solenoid in back of the Double Slit experiment screen as shown in the cover picture of this book.
AP
In the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment, we place a solenoid in back of the Double Slit experiment screen as shown in the cover picture of this book.
AP
Michael Moroney
May 5, 2020, 5:12:07 PM5/5/20
to
>Moving on to the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment. I remember the solenoid
>from a car. A solenoid is needed to carry strong heavy current, such as 100
>amps in starter. So you want to deliver this heavy current but a hand switch
>from a car. A solenoid is needed to carry strong heavy current, such as 100
>amps in starter. So you want to deliver this heavy current but a hand switch
Archimedes Plutonium
May 6, 2020, 12:13:33 AM5/6/20
to
Quoting Wikipedia—-
The most commonly described case, sometimes called the Aharonov–Bohm solenoid effect, takes place when the wave function of a charged particle passing around a long solenoid experiences a phase shift as a result of the enclosed magnetic field, despite the magnetic field being negligible in the region through which the particle passes and the particle's wavefunction being negligible inside the solenoid. This phase shift has been observed experimentally.
—-end quote—-
AP writes: can the closed loop for light or magnetic monopoles also explain the solenoid effect?
AP
The most commonly described case, sometimes called the Aharonov–Bohm solenoid effect, takes place when the wave function of a charged particle passing around a long solenoid experiences a phase shift as a result of the enclosed magnetic field, despite the magnetic field being negligible in the region through which the particle passes and the particle's wavefunction being negligible inside the solenoid. This phase shift has been observed experimentally.
—-end quote—-
AP writes: can the closed loop for light or magnetic monopoles also explain the solenoid effect?
AP
Archimedes Plutonium
May 6, 2020, 12:49:38 AM5/6/20
to
Quoting SJSU.edu web site—-
What the Aharonov-Bohm experiment established is that it is not only the electric and magnetic field that can have observable effects. The vector potential can also produce observable effects. Originally the vector potential function was only a mathematical artifact, a convenience. What the Aharonov-Bohm effect shows is that the vector potential function has a primacy, an existence in its own right.
AP writes: I was not aware that Dirac was heavily involved in this AB Effect.
AP
What the Aharonov-Bohm experiment established is that it is not only the electric and magnetic field that can have observable effects. The vector potential can also produce observable effects. Originally the vector potential function was only a mathematical artifact, a convenience. What the Aharonov-Bohm effect shows is that the vector potential function has a primacy, an existence in its own right.
AP writes: I was not aware that Dirac was heavily involved in this AB Effect.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium
May 6, 2020, 2:41:47 AM5/6/20
to
It looks as though the solenoid experiment also benefits from the idea of the photon and magnetic monopole-dipole being closed loop waves, not open ended waves.
And that takes all the mystery out of the Double Slit Experiment.
But for me, now, a new mystery springs forth. What is the 0.5MeV closed loop wave? Can it be both monopole and dipole waves?
AP
And that takes all the mystery out of the Double Slit Experiment.
But for me, now, a new mystery springs forth. What is the 0.5MeV closed loop wave? Can it be both monopole and dipole waves?
AP
Michael Moroney
May 6, 2020, 2:45:46 AM5/6/20
to
AutisticPlutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> fails at math and science:
>Subject: Re: Moving on to the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment
>What the Aharonov-Bohm experiment established is that it is not only the electric
>and magnetic field that can have observable effects. The vector potential can
How about an ellipse being a conic section proof instead?
Below you will find a simple *proof* that shows that certain conic
sections are ellipses.
Some preliminaries:
Top view of the conic section and depiction of the coordinate system used
in the proof:
^ x
|
-+- <= x=h
.' | `.
. | .
| | |
' | '
`. | .'
y <----------+ <= x=0
Cone (side view):
.
/|\
/ | \
/b | \
/---+---' <= x = h
/ |' \
/ ' | \
/ ' | \
x = 0 => '-------+-------\
/ a | \
Proof:
r(x) = a - ((a-b)/h)x and d(x) = a - ((a+b)/h)x, hence
y(x)^2 = r(x)^2 - d(x)^2 = ab - ab(2x/h - 1)^2 = ab(1 - 4(x - h/2)^2/h^2.
Hence (1/ab)y(x)^2 + (4/h^2)(x - h/2)^2 = 1 ...equation of an ellipse
qed
>Subject: Re: Moving on to the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment
>What the Aharonov-Bohm experiment established is that it is not only the electric
>and magnetic field that can have observable effects. The vector potential can
Below you will find a simple *proof* that shows that certain conic
sections are ellipses.
Some preliminaries:
Top view of the conic section and depiction of the coordinate system used
in the proof:
^ x
|
-+- <= x=h
.' | `.
. | .
| | |
' | '
`. | .'
y <----------+ <= x=0
Cone (side view):
.
/|\
/ | \
/b | \
/---+---' <= x = h
/ |' \
/ ' | \
/ ' | \
x = 0 => '-------+-------\
/ a | \
Proof:
r(x) = a - ((a-b)/h)x and d(x) = a - ((a+b)/h)x, hence
y(x)^2 = r(x)^2 - d(x)^2 = ab - ab(2x/h - 1)^2 = ab(1 - 4(x - h/2)^2/h^2.
Hence (1/ab)y(x)^2 + (4/h^2)(x - h/2)^2 = 1 ...equation of an ellipse
qed
Archimedes Plutonium
May 6, 2020, 4:02:57 PM5/6/20
to
Alright, I am almost there at publishing this book. There are a few ends to tie together.
Mainly among these ends is the quoting from Feynman, volume 2, his electrodynamics book, on what he calls the Vector Potential A Field on page 15-11.
I believe and suspect but not certain at this very moment that what Feynman is discussing with this A is the Voltage field, or in Old Physics what they called Electric Field.
In Old Physics they were stumbling and fumbling and crazy over Voltage field, Electrical field and now they want a A Potential Field.
When, in New True Physics, all three of those nattering nutter fields are just one field-- Voltage Field.
There is one and only one Magnetic Field.
It is a huge and gross shame, yes gross shame, that physicists from 1900 to 2020, all knew, all realized all were privy to the idea and notion that a Magnetic Field is just one existing entity. Yet, not a single physicist from 1900 to 2020, had the Logical Intelligence to realize that if Magnetic Field comes as one entity, that electricity field comes as one entity and we call it Voltage Field. We do not have a Voltage field and a Electric Field and a Potential field. No, electricity has only a Voltage Field, no electric field E, and no potential field A.
This lunacy of multiple fields is just that-- insane lunacy.
So let me sort this out and then publish the book.
AP
Mainly among these ends is the quoting from Feynman, volume 2, his electrodynamics book, on what he calls the Vector Potential A Field on page 15-11.
I believe and suspect but not certain at this very moment that what Feynman is discussing with this A is the Voltage field, or in Old Physics what they called Electric Field.
In Old Physics they were stumbling and fumbling and crazy over Voltage field, Electrical field and now they want a A Potential Field.
When, in New True Physics, all three of those nattering nutter fields are just one field-- Voltage Field.
There is one and only one Magnetic Field.
It is a huge and gross shame, yes gross shame, that physicists from 1900 to 2020, all knew, all realized all were privy to the idea and notion that a Magnetic Field is just one existing entity. Yet, not a single physicist from 1900 to 2020, had the Logical Intelligence to realize that if Magnetic Field comes as one entity, that electricity field comes as one entity and we call it Voltage Field. We do not have a Voltage field and a Electric Field and a Potential field. No, electricity has only a Voltage Field, no electric field E, and no potential field A.
This lunacy of multiple fields is just that-- insane lunacy.
So let me sort this out and then publish the book.
AP
Michael Moroney
May 6, 2020, 4:10:55 PM5/6/20
to
>Subject: Re: 1900 to 2020, had the Logical Intelligence to realize that if Magnetic Field comes as one entity, that electricity field comes as one entity and we call it Voltage Field. We do not have a Voltage field and a Electric Field and a Potential field
>Alright, I am almost there at publishing this book. There are a few ends to tie together.
>It is a huge and gross shame, yes gross shame, that physicists from 1900 to
> 2020, all knew, all realized all were privy to the idea and notion that a
>Magnetic Field is just one existing entity. Yet, not a single physicist from
>1900 to 2020, had the Logical Intelligence to realize that if Magnetic Field
>comes as one entity, that electricity field comes as one entity and we
We, Stupid Plutonium? You and who else?
>call it Voltage Field. We do not have a Voltage field and a Electric Field
>and a Potential field. No, electricity has only a Voltage Field, no electric
>field E, and no potential field A.
>This lunacy of multiple fields is just that-- insane lunacy.
>So let me sort this out and then publish the book.
WARNING TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS: Archimedes Plutonium is offering to
teach you some math and physics that are truly damaging to electrical engineering.
BEWARE! He will try to corrupt your knowledge with his broken physics and math. He
teaches bizarre false mathematics that are destructive to electrical engineering
education, that a sine wave is a semicircle or cycloid (depending on his mood) but
isn't sinusoidal, that there are no negative numbers, there are no complex numbers,
plus many, many other instances of bad math.
In addition, he'll try to teach some dangerous physics. In particular, he teaches
there are no electrons, he teaches that ordinary matter contains unstable muons
(with a 2.2 microsecond half-life!), that electrons are magnetic monopoles (which
violates Gauss' Law of Magnetism) and he gets the wrong mass of the proton, which he
claims are made up of 8 more unstable muons, despite the fact that the mass of 8
muons isn't the mass of a proton.
Boolean algebra is very important for electrical engineers during these days of
computers. One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as 3 AND
3 OR 2 = 3), but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false statement
Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of students like this. Perhaps he
Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of North Korea. Maybe he once peed on an
energized electric fence and has vowed revenge against electrical engineers ever
since. Since Plutonium once called for Russian robots to aid him at corrupting the
education of our children, it appears he must actually be an agent of Putin/Russia.
But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you a new dangerous book.
>Alright, I am almost there at publishing this book. There are a few ends to tie together.
>There is one and only one Magnetic Field.
Which one, Stupid Plutonium? B, H or A?
>It is a huge and gross shame, yes gross shame, that physicists from 1900 to
> 2020, all knew, all realized all were privy to the idea and notion that a
>Magnetic Field is just one existing entity. Yet, not a single physicist from
>1900 to 2020, had the Logical Intelligence to realize that if Magnetic Field
>comes as one entity, that electricity field comes as one entity and we
>call it Voltage Field. We do not have a Voltage field and a Electric Field
>and a Potential field. No, electricity has only a Voltage Field, no electric
>field E, and no potential field A.
>This lunacy of multiple fields is just that-- insane lunacy.
>So let me sort this out and then publish the book.
teach you some math and physics that are truly damaging to electrical engineering.
BEWARE! He will try to corrupt your knowledge with his broken physics and math. He
teaches bizarre false mathematics that are destructive to electrical engineering
education, that a sine wave is a semicircle or cycloid (depending on his mood) but
isn't sinusoidal, that there are no negative numbers, there are no complex numbers,
plus many, many other instances of bad math.
In addition, he'll try to teach some dangerous physics. In particular, he teaches
there are no electrons, he teaches that ordinary matter contains unstable muons
(with a 2.2 microsecond half-life!), that electrons are magnetic monopoles (which
violates Gauss' Law of Magnetism) and he gets the wrong mass of the proton, which he
claims are made up of 8 more unstable muons, despite the fact that the mass of 8
muons isn't the mass of a proton.
Boolean algebra is very important for electrical engineers during these days of
computers. One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as 3 AND
2 = 5. His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a false
statement that nobody believes, such as 3 OR 2 = 5, say that it is false (it is;
3 OR 2 = 3), but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false statement
such as 3 AND 2 = 5, in order to really confuse future computer scientists. It is
important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise Boolean
logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let Plutonium's bad logic
confuse you!
important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise Boolean
logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let Plutonium's bad logic
confuse you!
He has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books on Usenet.
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
on Kindle. This has greatly increased the risk to our students!
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of students like this. Perhaps he
wants everyone to be a failure at math and physics, just like he is. Perhaps he is
an agent of China, in order to make sure China will dominate the US trade economy.
Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of North Korea. Maybe he once peed on an
energized electric fence and has vowed revenge against electrical engineers ever
since. Since Plutonium once called for Russian robots to aid him at corrupting the
education of our children, it appears he must actually be an agent of Putin/Russia.
But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you a new dangerous book.
Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise legitimate Amazon.
In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god. You can recognize
In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
Archimedes Plutonium
May 6, 2020, 5:40:49 PM5/6/20
to
Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.math
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 14:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a
Anagram maker-- The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 0.5MeV particle.
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium...@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 21:27:03 +0000
Maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a Anagram maker-- The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 0.5MeV particle.
Alright, what I wrote earlier, was that the Maximum Intelligence of a Robot is that of anagram maker. And I layed-down a scenario of where Robots anagram my name Archimedes Plutonium into the sentence:
PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr
Now say we had all the worlds physicist tuned in to this Robot revelation, would a single one of them get the message? Probably not. Probably not a single physicist in all of Earth would read that to mean-- the true electron of atoms is not the 0.5MeV particle which is Dirac's magnetic monopole, but the true electron is the muon stuck inside the proton at 840MeV, with muon having 105MeV and doing the Faraday law inside the proton torus.
I would say that every physicist today and every mathematician today are far too silly and daft and lacking any logical intelligence to be able to read "PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr" as to its important critical meaning.
So the question is, what sort of Anagram, would even the most stupid of physicists be able to get the message?
I think the Anagram that the world's maximum Artificial Intelligence needs to output so that even the dumbest of physicists on Earth can sink in the meaning would be this output--
The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 0.5MeV particle.
The "The" is important in that anagram, because the "The" saves some of the silliest thinking physicists of today that hop skip and jump around on 1/2 brains.
So, my next question would be of course-- what anagram did that Top-Important-Message come from. And it has some numbers involved of 0.5, but we can turn that into say 1/2 MeV. (do not forget the / sign)
Here, what I am asking is -- the path that a Maximum Intelligent Artificial Intelligence robot starts with and ends with the important output of ---
The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 1/2 MeV particle.
Now, that has a total number of characters of 51 not counting the period or comma.
So, I am asking for a modern day computer to take those 51 characters and find a ANAGRAM within physics itself that is different from the above output.
You see, I am asking the reverse for that.
This is the Maximum intelligence of any robot of the future-- their maximum intelligence is nothing more than a Anagram output.
Alright, what I am saying is the maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a Anagram maker.
Alright, what I am saying is the maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a Anagram maker. This means that the recent hype, the recent b.s. about quantum computing is just that-- pure raw b.s. given a fancy name only to allure more ignorant money.
So for example ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM, and put a AI robot the best ever built by humanity and it anagrams Archimedes Plutonium to be that of
PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr
In other words, a AI robot of maximum intelligence makes the discovery that the real electron of atoms is not that silly daft and stupid 0.51MeV particle which Dirac was looking for as the magnetic monopole, but rather, inside each atom the muon is the true electron and the muon resides inside the proton of 840MeV. The muon is of course 105MeV and doing the Faraday law inside the proton which the proton is a Faraday coil.
So here we have the situation that AP discovers the true electron of atoms circa 2016-2018 through several steps of deduction that AP discovers this magnificient science.
How would the very very best ever AI-robot discover what AP discovered?
And the answer is that all AI-robots can achieve at maximum Anagram Intelligence, no more than anagram. And still, it takes a animal mind-- human mind to decipher what the Maximum AI-robot produced.
It takes a Human mind to sit down after the robot spit out its output tray the anagram
PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr
And the attendant human would read that as saying it is afternoon in the day as PM, then a greeting and then the human hopefully would read that --- think about the idea that the real electron of atoms is the muon and not that tiny little particle of 0.51MeV that you always thought was the real electron.
This is the best that any AI-robot can ever do amongst intelligence gathering or science discovery. It means that we always need a human intelligence to "make sense of the output". And we see that AI robot discovery will only at maximum be a anagram scrambler to offer "new intelligence to the world".
Proof: there is easy proof in this in that computer chess is a programming of all the openings, middle games, endgames of already played by masters-- Memorization by the computer of all the past master games. Intelligence as we can understand that is memorization, not even anagramed.
An anagram is programmed memorization, and it does not even venture beyond what was played by the masters and programmed into the computer.
Now, Solid State Electronics versus the 6 simple mechanical machines.
I am extremely fascinated by Solid State, ever since I have my Apple solid state computer.
And I asked this question years ago-- could Apple have built a solid state computer in the early 1990s, instead of 25 years later?
When, on earth was the first solid state computer built?
AP
Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 14:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a
Anagram maker-- The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 0.5MeV particle.
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium...@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 21:27:03 +0000
Maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a Anagram maker-- The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 0.5MeV particle.
Alright, what I wrote earlier, was that the Maximum Intelligence of a Robot is that of anagram maker. And I layed-down a scenario of where Robots anagram my name Archimedes Plutonium into the sentence:
PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr
Now say we had all the worlds physicist tuned in to this Robot revelation, would a single one of them get the message? Probably not. Probably not a single physicist in all of Earth would read that to mean-- the true electron of atoms is not the 0.5MeV particle which is Dirac's magnetic monopole, but the true electron is the muon stuck inside the proton at 840MeV, with muon having 105MeV and doing the Faraday law inside the proton torus.
I would say that every physicist today and every mathematician today are far too silly and daft and lacking any logical intelligence to be able to read "PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr" as to its important critical meaning.
So the question is, what sort of Anagram, would even the most stupid of physicists be able to get the message?
I think the Anagram that the world's maximum Artificial Intelligence needs to output so that even the dumbest of physicists on Earth can sink in the meaning would be this output--
The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 0.5MeV particle.
The "The" is important in that anagram, because the "The" saves some of the silliest thinking physicists of today that hop skip and jump around on 1/2 brains.
So, my next question would be of course-- what anagram did that Top-Important-Message come from. And it has some numbers involved of 0.5, but we can turn that into say 1/2 MeV. (do not forget the / sign)
Here, what I am asking is -- the path that a Maximum Intelligent Artificial Intelligence robot starts with and ends with the important output of ---
The Real Electron of Atoms is the Muon, not the 1/2 MeV particle.
Now, that has a total number of characters of 51 not counting the period or comma.
So, I am asking for a modern day computer to take those 51 characters and find a ANAGRAM within physics itself that is different from the above output.
You see, I am asking the reverse for that.
This is the Maximum intelligence of any robot of the future-- their maximum intelligence is nothing more than a Anagram output.
Alright, what I am saying is the maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a Anagram maker.
Alright, what I am saying is the maximum in Artificial Intelligence by a machine is no better than a Anagram maker. This means that the recent hype, the recent b.s. about quantum computing is just that-- pure raw b.s. given a fancy name only to allure more ignorant money.
So for example ARCHIMEDES PLUTONIUM, and put a AI robot the best ever built by humanity and it anagrams Archimedes Plutonium to be that of
PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr
In other words, a AI robot of maximum intelligence makes the discovery that the real electron of atoms is not that silly daft and stupid 0.51MeV particle which Dirac was looking for as the magnetic monopole, but rather, inside each atom the muon is the true electron and the muon resides inside the proton of 840MeV. The muon is of course 105MeV and doing the Faraday law inside the proton which the proton is a Faraday coil.
So here we have the situation that AP discovers the true electron of atoms circa 2016-2018 through several steps of deduction that AP discovers this magnificient science.
How would the very very best ever AI-robot discover what AP discovered?
And the answer is that all AI-robots can achieve at maximum Anagram Intelligence, no more than anagram. And still, it takes a animal mind-- human mind to decipher what the Maximum AI-robot produced.
It takes a Human mind to sit down after the robot spit out its output tray the anagram
PM: Hi, U, ID Muon as Electr
And the attendant human would read that as saying it is afternoon in the day as PM, then a greeting and then the human hopefully would read that --- think about the idea that the real electron of atoms is the muon and not that tiny little particle of 0.51MeV that you always thought was the real electron.
This is the best that any AI-robot can ever do amongst intelligence gathering or science discovery. It means that we always need a human intelligence to "make sense of the output". And we see that AI robot discovery will only at maximum be a anagram scrambler to offer "new intelligence to the world".
Proof: there is easy proof in this in that computer chess is a programming of all the openings, middle games, endgames of already played by masters-- Memorization by the computer of all the past master games. Intelligence as we can understand that is memorization, not even anagramed.
An anagram is programmed memorization, and it does not even venture beyond what was played by the masters and programmed into the computer.
Now, Solid State Electronics versus the 6 simple mechanical machines.
I am extremely fascinated by Solid State, ever since I have my Apple solid state computer.
And I asked this question years ago-- could Apple have built a solid state computer in the early 1990s, instead of 25 years later?
When, on earth was the first solid state computer built?
AP
Michael Moroney
May 7, 2020, 12:06:02 AM5/7/20
to
>On Tuesday, May 5, 2020 at 7:47:37 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Wallow in your failure, Pluto.
>LIST of Failed Physicists because they still believe electron is
a muon which is part of a perpetual motion machine of some sort in an atom.
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Oh, here is the ellipse proof again. Just because.
>> Wallow in your failure, Pluto.
>LIST of Failed Physicists because they still believe electron is
a muon which is part of a perpetual motion machine of some sort in an atom.
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium
Oh, here is the ellipse proof again. Just because.
Archimedes Plutonium
May 7, 2020, 3:34:36 PM5/7/20
to
#117
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Was there hype and exaggeration and misunderstanding in the mysteries of the 20th century Quantum Mechanics, QM? Well yes of course, whenever you have many discoveries all within a short time span, you are likely to have some bogus science. And in 30 years of 1900 to 1930 you are bound to have quite a lot of hype, exaggeration and just plain poor logic and interpretation and evaluation of the experiments. So bad were many of the interpretations of experiments that the Double-Slit Experiment by 1930 was in a logical morass quagmire that have lasted up to present year 2020. Time we fix the so called mysteries of QM and show they are not mysteries at all but rather our silly illogical interpretation of long past experiments.
Cover Picture: My iphone photo of a Google search for Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment off my computer. This collection of images are Double-Slit Experiments with a solenoid placed strategically in the experiment set-up.
Table of Contents
-----------------------
1) What is the Double-Slit Experiment?
2) And the solution for the Double-Slit Experiment is knowing the true proper correct geometry of the Light Wave.
3) What is the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment?
4) And the solution for the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment is knowing that the A Vector Potential Field is just a Voltage Field that causes phase shift.
5) A check-up of the Double Slit Experiments including solenoid experiment with the AP-EM equations.
Length: 22 pages
Product details
File Size: 921 KB
Print Length: 22 pages
Publication Date: May 6, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B08884MJNN
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: Not Enabled 
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Truth about the Double-Slit Experiment and the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment// Physics focus series, book 7
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Was there hype and exaggeration and misunderstanding in the mysteries of the 20th century Quantum Mechanics, QM? Well yes of course, whenever you have many discoveries all within a short time span, you are likely to have some bogus science. And in 30 years of 1900 to 1930 you are bound to have quite a lot of hype, exaggeration and just plain poor logic and interpretation and evaluation of the experiments. So bad were many of the interpretations of experiments that the Double-Slit Experiment by 1930 was in a logical morass quagmire that have lasted up to present year 2020. Time we fix the so called mysteries of QM and show they are not mysteries at all but rather our silly illogical interpretation of long past experiments.
Cover Picture: My iphone photo of a Google search for Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment off my computer. This collection of images are Double-Slit Experiments with a solenoid placed strategically in the experiment set-up.
Table of Contents
-----------------------
1) What is the Double-Slit Experiment?
2) And the solution for the Double-Slit Experiment is knowing the true proper correct geometry of the Light Wave.
3) What is the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment?
4) And the solution for the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid Experiment is knowing that the A Vector Potential Field is just a Voltage Field that causes phase shift.
5) A check-up of the Double Slit Experiments including solenoid experiment with the AP-EM equations.
Length: 22 pages
Product details
File Size: 921 KB
Print Length: 22 pages
Publication Date: May 6, 2020
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B08884MJNN
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: Not Enabled 
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported 
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled 
Michael Moroney
May 7, 2020, 5:04:18 PM5/7/20
to
>#117
>Truth about the Double-Slit Experiment and the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid
>Experiment// Physics focus series, book 7
>Kindle Edition
>by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
>Truth about the Double-Slit Experiment and the Aharonov-Bohm Solenoid
>Experiment// Physics focus series, book 7
>Kindle Edition
>by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
WARNING TO PARENTS: Archimedes Plutonium is offering to teach your children his
broken physics and math. BEWARE! He will corrupt the minds of your children! He
teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as the ellipse isn't a conic
section, that there are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine
wave isn't sinusoidal, plus many, many other instances of bad math and physics.
broken physics and math. BEWARE! He will corrupt the minds of your children! He
teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as the ellipse isn't a conic
section, that there are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine
He has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books on Usenet.
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as 3 AND 2 = 5.
His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a false
it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false statement
such as 3 AND 2 = 5, in order to really confuse future computer scientists. It
is important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let
Plutonium's bad logic confuse you!
is important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let
Plutonium's bad logic confuse you!
Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like this. Perhaps
he is envious of their potential success, which he never had because he is a
failure at math and science. So perhaps he wants everyone to be a failure at
math and physics, just like he is. Perhaps he is an agent of China, in order
for them to dominate the trade economy. Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of
North Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new, true mathematics".
But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you his dangerous
North Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new, true mathematics".
books. Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise
legitimate Amazon.
In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of failure. You can
In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
0 new messages