Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

7Barry Shein's Moroney's world std ad-hominems-- why Daniel Freedman, Michel Goemans, Vadim Gorin, Harvey Greenspan, flunked calculus & angular momentum never realizing Real proton has to be 840MeV

11 views
Skip to first unread message

Archimedes Plutonium

unread,
Apr 23, 2018, 3:47:02 PM4/23/18
to
7Barry Shein's Moroney's world std ad-hominems-- why Daniel Freedman, Michel Goemans, Vadim Gorin, Harvey Greenspan, flunked calculus & angular momentum never realizing Real proton has to be 840MeV and Real Electron is the muon at 105MeV and the .5MeV particle was Dirac’s magnetic monopole

Michael Moroney writes:

11:23 PM (15 minutes ago)

> but don't you think you should worry about your
>own Alzheimers, not the idiot President?

0
//\/
\/\
... /
---------------------

Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 21:44:15 -0700 (PDT)

Subject: Moroney picking the dumbest people in math and physics in Boston with
his tests--Michael Artin, L. Reif, William Bertozzi, Jacob Barandes, Barry
Shein of world std
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 04:44:15 +0000

Moroney picking the dumbest people in math and physics in Boston with his tests--Michael Artin, L. Reif, William Bertozzi, Jacob Barandes, Barry Shein of world std

Michael Moroney writes:
Apr 21

>Now you're getting

And here:


[ ] ...and to the wrong newsgroup...
[ ] ...multiple times...
[X] ...in a topic/topics explicitly created by him for doing so...
[ ] ...with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test never taken...
[X] ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
[X] ...who are university math or physics professors...
[X] ...and he includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors...
[ ] ...to the extent the comment is no longer recognizable...
[ ] ...includes random snippets by other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...which are attributed to yet other critics, spammers or babblers...
[X] ...or the "you gotta draw pictures of calculus" repost...
[X] ...and includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing...
[X] ...which, of course, is not actually a mistake at all...


AP writes:: Moroney failed even Grade School Math for here he was asked percentage-- 938 is what percent short of 945

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.

Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

>
> Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

AP writes:: Moroney--the tireless stalker for 25 years-- they are all dumb, and Moroney the dumbest of all, the very dumbest of them all, for to this very day you believe 1 OR 2 = 3, you believe an ellipse is a conic section when it was a cylinder section, so pathetically dumb is Moroney who still believes sine is a sinusoid when in truth it is a semicircle wave, you believe Oresme harmonic series diverges when in reality it converges, you believe Calculus works by having rectangles of 0 width (see below). And worst of all, the pathetic ignorant Moroney of Boston believes you can have a covalent bond in chemistry with a proton at 938 and electron at .5 MeV, when the truth be known the proton is 840MeV and electron = 105 MeV and the .5MeV particle was what Dirac was chasing after all his life— magnetic monopole. So, all of you are just plain dumb and ignorant about both math and physics. How can anyone in Boston, go to class in any college and believe 1 OR 2 = 3, when even a street urchin knows 1 AND 2 = 3

MIT math dept.

Michael Artin, Martin Bazant, Bonnie Berger, Roman Bezrukavnikov, Alexei Borodin, John Bush, Herman Chernoff, Henry Cohn, Laurent Demanet*, Richard Dudley, Jörn Dunkel, Alan Edelman, Pavel Etingof *, Daniel Freedman, Michel Goemans, Vadim Gorin, Harvey Greenspan *, Victor Guillemin, Larry Guth, Sigurdur Helgason, Anette Hosoi, David Jerison, Steven Johnson, Victor Kac, Steven Kleiman, Daniel Kleitman, Andrew Lawrie, Tom Leighton, George Lusztig, Arthur Mattuck, Davesh Maulik, Richard Melrose, Haynes Miller, William Minicozzi, Ankur Moitra, Elchanan Mossel, Tomasz Mrowka, James Munkres, Andrei Negut, Aaron Pixton, Bjorn Poonen, Alexander Postnikov, Philippe Rigollet, Rodolfo Rosales, Giulia Saccà, Gerald Sacks, Paul Seidel, Scott Sheffield, Peter Shor, Isadore Singer, Michael Sipser, Jared Speck, Gigliola Staffilani, Richard Stanley, Harold Stark, Gilbert Strang, Daniel Stroock, Goncalo Tabuada, Alar Toomre, David Vogan

President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

MIT physics dept
William Bertozzi, Robert Birgeneau, Hale Bradt, Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins *, Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young


Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole

President Larry Summers

Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai *
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman*, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin

Harvard Math dept

Noam Elkies, Dennis Gaitsgory, Robin Gottlieb, Benedict Gross, Joseph Harris, Heisuke Hironaka, Michael Hopkins, Arthur Jaffe, David Kazhdan, Mark Kisin, Peter Kronheimer, Jacob Lurie, Eric Maskin, Barry Mazur, Curtis McMullen, David Mumford, Martin Nowak, Gerald Sacks, Wilfried Schmid, Yum-Tong Siu, Shlomo Sternberg, John Tate, Cliff Taubes, Hugh Woodin, Horng-Tzer Yau, Shing-Tung Yau

/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Boston?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

SEE PICTURE DIAGRAM of FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS below, professors hate teaching this for it shows their "limit calculus to be a joke"

PICTURE DIAGRAM OF FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS

By April 2015, was there for the first time a picture diagram proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, FTC, not just an analysis argument, but a geometry proof (see below). Old Math could never assemble a picture diagram of the FTC. All they could do is argue with limit concept an analysis argument, never a geometry proof of FTC.

A picture diagram proof of FTC changes all of calculus and thus, changes all of mathematics for it requires a infinity borderline to produce an actual number for the infinitesimal, and that number is the inverse of the infinity borderline. Requiring a infinity borderline to produce the infinitesimal changes all of mathematics, and throwing out the limit concept. By changing all of Calculus and thus correcting mathematics, all of math before 2015 was just trash math.

Picture Diagram needed for Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

Why no continuum and no curves exist in Math, so that the Calculus
can exist, and does exist

by Archimedes Plutonium

Calculus is based upon there being Grid points in geometry, no
continuum, but actually, empty space between two neighboring points.
This is called Discrete geometry, and in physics, this is called
Quantum Mechanics. In 10 Grid, the first few numbers are 0, .1, .2,
.3, etc. That means there does not exist any number between 0 and .1,
no number exists between .1 and .2. Now if you want more precise
numbers, you go to a higher Grid like that of 100 Grid where the first
few numbers are 0, .01, .02, .03, etc.

Calculus in order to exist at all, needs this empty space between
consecutive numbers or successor numbers. It needs that empty space so
that the integral of calculus is actually small rectangles whose
interior area is not zero. So in 10 Grid, the smallest width of any
Calculus rectangle is of width .1. In 100 Grid the smallest width is
.01.

But, this revolutionary understanding of Calculus does not stop with
the Integral, for having empty space between numbers, means no curves
in math exist, but are ever tinier straight-line segments.

It also means, that the Derivative in Calculus is part and parcel of
the function graph itself. So that in a function such as y = x^2, the
function graph is the derivative at a point. In Old Math, they had the
folly and idiocy of a foreign, alien tangent line to a function graph
as derivative. In New Math, the derivative is the same as the function
graph itself. And, this makes commonsense, utter commonsense, for the
derivative is a prediction of the future of the function in question,
and no way in the world can a foreign tangent line to a point on the
function be able to predict, be able to tell where the future point of
that function be. The only predictor of a future point of a function,
is the function graph itself.

If the Calculus was done correctly, conceived correctly, then a
minimal diagram explains all of Calculus. Old Math never had such a
diagram, because Old Math was in total error of what Calculus is, and
what Calculus does.

The fundamental picture of all of Calculus are these two of a
trapezoid and rectangle. In fact, call the picture, the

FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS, Picture

Trapezoid for derivative as the roof-top of
the trapezoid, which must be a straight-line segment. If it is curved,
you cannot fold it down to form a integral rectangle. And the
rectangle for integral as area.

From this:
B
/|
/ |
A /----|
/ |
| |
|____|


The trapezoid roof has to be a straight-line segment (the derivative)
so that it can be hinged at A, and swiveled down to form rectangle for
integral.

To this:

______
| |
| |
| |
---------

And the derivative of x= A, above is merely the dy/dx involving points
A and B. Thus, it can never be a curve in Calculus. And the AB is part
of the function graph itself. No curves exist in mathematics and no
continuum exists in mathematics.

In the above we see that CALCULUS needs and requires a diagram in
which you can go from derivative to integral, or go from integral to
derivative, by simply a hinge down to form a rectangle for area, or a
hinge up to form the derivative from a given rectangle.

Why in Old Math could no professor of math ever do the Calculus
Diagram? Why? The answer is simple, no-one in Old Math pays attention
to Logic, and that no-one in Old Math was required to take formal
Logic when they attended school. So a person bereft of Logic, is never
going to find mistakes of Logic and think clear and think straight.

by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

Michael Moroney

unread,
Apr 23, 2018, 11:02:12 PM4/23/18
to
Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com> writes:

>7Barry Shein's Moroney's world std ad-hominems-- why Daniel Freedman, Michel

Wow, just wow. It's no secret that Archie doesn't exactly like me for
correcting his broken physics.

It seems absurd that he repeats that stupid kind of posting yet again
after I tell him how stupid those posts are. What I figure that he must be
doing is saying to himself "There's no way in hell that I'm going to ever
let that Moroney guy tell me to stop failing! I'm going to fail as much as
possible whenever he tells me to quit failing! That will show him!!"
0 new messages