This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics

[john baez]

Here's this week's reading material. The first test will be in two
weeks. :-)

1) On the Vassiliev Knot Invariants by Dror Bar-Natan, Harvard
University ``pre-preprint.''

I went to UC San Diego this week to give a talk, and the timing was
nice, because Dror Bar-Natan was there. He is a student of Witten who
has started from Witten's ideas relating knot theory and quantum field
theory and developed them into a beautiful picture that shows how knot
theory, the theory of classical Lie algebras, and abstract Feynman
diagrams are three faces of the same thing. To put it boldly, in a
deliberately exaggerated form, Bar-Natan has proposed a conjecture
saying that knot theory and the theory of classical Lie algebras are
one and the same!

This won't seem very exciting if you don't know what a classical Lie
algebra is. Let me give a brief and very sketchy introduction,
apologizing in advance to all the experts for the terrible sins I will
commit, such as failing to distinguish between complex and real Lie
algebras.

Well, remember that a Lie algebra is just a vector space
equipped with a "bracket" such that the bracket [x,y] of any two vectors
x and y is again a vector, and such that the following hold:

a) skew-symmetry: [x,y] = -[y,x].
b) bilinearity: [x,ay] = a[x,y], [x,y+z] = [x,y] + [x,z]. (a is a number.)
c) Jacobi identity: [x,[y,z]] + [y,[z,x]] + [z,[x,y]] = 0.

The best known example is good old R^3 with the cross product as the
bracket. But the real importance of Lie algebras is that one can get
one from any Lie group - roughly speaking, a group that's also a
manifold, and such that the group operations are smooth maps. And the
importance of Lie groups is that they are what crop up as the groups of
symmetries in physics. The Lie algebra is essentially the
"infinitesimal version" of the corresponding Lie group, as anyone has
seen who has taken physics and seen the relation between the group of
rotations in R^3 and the cross product. Here the group is called SO(3)
and the Lie algebra is called so(3). (So R^3 with its cross product is
called so(3).) One can generalize this to any number of dimensions,
letting SO(n) denote the group of rotations in R^n and so(n) the
corresponding Lie algebra. (However, so(n) is not isomorphic to R^n
except for n = 3, so there is something very special about three
dimensions.)

Similarly, if one uses complex numbers instead of real numbers,
one gets a group SU(n) and Lie algebra su(n). And if one looks at the
symmetries of a 2n-dimensional classical phase
space - so-called canonical transformations, or symplectic
transformations - one gets the group Sp(n) and Lie algebra sp(n).
To be precise, SO(n) consists of all nxn orthogonal real matrices with
determinant 1, SU(n) consists of all nxn unitary complex matrices with
determinant 1, and Sp(n) consists of all (2n)x(2n) real matrices
preserving a nondegenerate skew-symmetric form.

These are all very important in physics. Indeed, all the "gauge groups"
of physics are Lie groups of a certain sort, so-called compact
Lie groups, and in the standard model all the forces are
symmetrical under some gauge group or other. Electromagnetism a la
Maxwell is symmetric under the group U(1) of complex numbers of unit
magnitude, or "phases". The electroweak force (unified electromagnetism
and weak force) is symmetric under U(1) x SU(2), where one uses the fact
that one can build up bigger semisimple Lie groups as direct sums
(also called products) of smaller ones. The gauge group for the
strong force is SU(3). And, finally, the gauge group of the whole
standard model is simply U(1) x SU(2) x SU(3), which results from
lumping the electroweak and strong gauge groups together. This direct
sum business also works for the Lie algebras, so the Lie algebra
relevant to the standard model is written u(1) x su(2) x su(3).

There are certain very special Lie algebras called simple Lie algebras
which play the role of "elementary building blocks" in the world of Lie
algebras. They cannot be written as the direct sum of other Lie
algebras (and in fact there is an even stronger sense in which they
cannot be decomposed). On the other hand, the Lie algebra of any
compact Lie group is a direct sum of simple Lie algebras and copies of
u(1) - the one-dimensional Lie algebra with zero Lie bracket which, for
technical reasons, people don't call "simple".

These simple Lie algebras were classified by the monumental work of
Killing, Cartan and others, and the classification is strikingly simple:
there are infinite series of "classical" Lie algebras of type
su(n), so(n), and sp(n), and five "exceptional" Lie algebras
called G_2, F_4, E_6, E_7, and E_8. Believe it or not, there is a deep
connection between the exceptional Lie algebras and the Platonic solids.
But that is another story, one I barely know....

Now, Witten showed how one could use quantum field theory to constuct an
invariant of knots, or even links, corresponding to any representation
of a compact Lie group. (You won't even need to know what a
representation is to understand what follows.) This had been done in a
different way, in terms of "quantum groups," by Reshetikhin and Turaev
(following up on work by many other people). These invariants are
polynomials in a variable q (for "quantum"), and if one writes q as
e^hbar and expands a power series in hbar, the coefficient of hbar^n is
a "Vassiliev invariant of degree n". Recall from last week that
given an invariant of oriented knots, one can extend
it to knot with arbitrarily many nice crossings by setting
the value of the invariant on a knot with a crossing like

\ /
\/
/\
/ \

to be the invariant of the knot with the crossing changed to

\ /
\ /
/
/ \
/ \

minus the invariant of the knot with the crossing changed to

\ /
\ /
\
/ \
/ \

(Again, the knot has to be oriented for this rule to make sense,
and the strands shown in the pictures above should be pointing
downwards.) Having made this extension, one says a knot
invariant is a Vassiliev invariant of degree n if it vanishes
on all knot with n+1 or more double points.

This is where Dror stepped in, roughly. First of all, he showed that
the Vassiliev invariant of degree n is just what you get when you do
Witten's quantum-field-theoretic calculations perturbatively using
Feynman diagrams and look at the terms of order n in Planck's constant,
hbar! Secondly, and more surprisingly, he developed a bunch of
relationships between Feynman diagrams and pictures of knots! The third
and most amazing thing he did takes a bit longer to explain...

Roughly, he showed that any Vassiliev invariant of degree n is
determined by some combinatorial data called a "weight system." He
showed that any representation of a Lie algebra determines a weight
system and hence a Vassiliev invariant. But the really interesting
thing he showed is that many of the things one can do for Lie algebras
can be done for arbitrary weight systems. This makes it plausible that
EVERY weight system, hence every Vassiliev invariant, comes from a
representation of a simple Lie algebra. In fact, Dror conjectures that
every Vassiliev invariant comes from a representation of a classical
simple Lie algebra. Now there is another conjecture floating around
these days, namely that Vassiliev invariants almost form a complete set
- that is, that if two knots cannot be distinguished by any Vassiliev
invariants, they must either be the same or differ simply by reversing the
orientation of all the strands. If BOTH these conjectures are true,
one has in some sense practically reduced the theory of knots to the
theory of the classical Lie algebras! This wouldn't mean that all of
sudden we know the answer to every question about knots, but it would
certainly help a lot, and more importantly, in my opinion, it would show
that the connection between topology and the theory of Lie algebras is far
more profound than we really understand. The ramifications for physics,
as I hope all my chatting about knots, gauge theories and quantum
gravity makes clear, might also be profound.

Well, we *certainly* don't understand all this stuff yet, since we don't know
how to prove these conjectures! But Dror's conjecture - that all weight
systems come from representations of simple Lie algebras - is
tantalizingly close to being within grasp, since he has reduced it to a
fairly elementary combinatorial problem, which I will now state. Note
that "elementary" does not mean easy to solve! Just easy to state.

Before I state the combinatorial problem, let me say
something about the evidence for the conjecture that all Vassiliev
invariants come from representations of classical Lie algebras. In
addition to all sorts of "technical" evidence, Dror has shown the
conjecture is true for Vassiliev invariants of degree <= 9 by means
of many hours of computation using his Sparcstation. In fact, he said
in his talk that he felt guilty about having a Sparcstation unless it
was always computing something, and that even as he spoke his computer
was busily verifying the conjecture for higher degrees. (I suggested
that it was the Sparcstation that should feel guilty when it was not
working, not him.) He also advertised that his programs, a mixture of C
and Mathematica code, are available by anonymous ftp from math.harvard.
Use user name "ftp", go to the directory "dror". You folks with Crays
should feel VERY guilty if they are just sitting there and not helping
Dror verify this important conjecture. (I suggest that you first read his
papers and the file README in his directory, then check out his
programs, and then ask him where he's at and what would be worth doing.
Please don't pester him unless you are a good enough mathematician to
discuss this stuff intelligently and have megaflops to burn. If you
want to make a fool of yourself, *don't* say I sent you.)

Okay, with no further ado, here's the conjecture in its elementary
combinatorial form. Let B be the vector space spanned by finite graphs with
univalent and "oriented" trivalent vertices, modulo some
relations... first of all, a trivalent vertex is "oriented" if there is
a cyclic ordering of the three incident edges. That is, we "orient" the
vertex

\ /
\ /
\ /
|
|
|

by drawing a little clockwise or counterclockwise-pointing circle at the
vertex. (Or, for those of an algebraic bent, label the edges by 1,2,3
but then mod out by cyclic permutations.) The relations are: 1) if we
reverse the orientation of a trivalent vertex, that's equivalent to
multiplying the graph by -1. (Remember we're in a vector space spanned
by graphs.) 2)

------ | | \ /
| = |____| - \/
| | | /\
------ | | / \

(That is, we can make this substitution anywhere we want; these pictures
might be part of a bigger graph. Note that the "X" is not a vertex,
since there aren't quadrivalent vertices; it's just one edge going over
or under another. It doesn't matter whether it goes over or under since
these are abstract graphs, not graphs embedded in space.)

Now, let B_m be the vector space spanned by "labelled" finite graphs
with univalent and oriented trivalent vertices, modulo some relations...
but first I have to say what "labelled" means. It means that each edge
is labelled with a 1 or -1. The relations are: 1) if we reverse the
orientation of a trivalent vertex, it's the same as multiplying the
labellings of all three incident edges by -1. 2)

------ | |
| = |____|
| | |
------ | |

*if* the internal edge is labelled with a 1. (Here the 4 external edges
can have any labellings and we don't mess with that.)

Now, define a linear map from B to B_m by mapping any graph to the
signed sum of the 2^{number of edges} ways of labelling the edges with -1
or -1. Symbolically,

1 -1
-------- -> --------- - --------- .

Of course, one must work a bit to show this map is well-defined. (This
just takes a paragraph - see Proposition 6.5 of Dror's paper.)

Okay, the conjecture is:

THIS MAP IS ONE-TO-ONE.

If you can solve it, you've made great progress in showing that knots
and classical Lie groups are just two aspects of the same branch of
mathematics. Don't work on it, though, until you get Dror's paper and
make sure I stated it exactly right!!!!!

2) Mathematical problems of non-perturbative quantum general
relativity, by Abhay Ashtekar, lectures delivered at the 1992 Les
Houches summer school on Gravitation and Quantization, December 2, 1992,
available as Syracuse University physics preprint SU-GP-92/11-2.

This is a good overview of the loop variables approach to quantizing
general relativity as it currently stands. It begins with a review of
the basic difficulties with quantizing gravity, as viewed from three
perspectives: the particle physicist, the mathematical physicist, and
the general relativist. Technically, a main problem is that general
relativity consists of both evolution equations and constraint equations
on the initial data (which are roughly the metric of space at a given
time and its first time derivative, or really "extrinsic curvature").
So Ashtekar reviews Dirac's ideas on quantizing constrained systems
before sketching how this program is carried out for general relativity.

Then he considers a "toy model" - quantum gravity in 2+1 dimensions.
This is a funny theory because *classically* Einstein's equations in 2+1
dimensions simply say that spacetime is flat (in a vacuum)! No
gravitational waves exist as in 3+1 dimensions, and one can say that the
information in the gravitational field is "purely global" - locally,
everywhere looks the same as everywhere else (like Iowa), but there may
be global "twists" that you notice when going around a noncontractible loop.
There has been a lot of work on 2+1 gravity recently - in a sense this problem
has been solved, by a number of methods - and this allows one to
understand *some* of the conceptual difficulties of honest
3+1-dimensional quantum gravity without getting caught in an endless net
of technical complications.

Then Ashtekar jumps back to 3+1 dimensions and gives a more thorough
introduction to the loop variables approach. He ends by going through
some of the many open problems and possible ways to attack them.

I have worn myself out trying to do justice to Bar-Natan's work, so I
will postpone until next week a review of Kapranov and Voevodsky's paper
on 2-categories. Also, a reminder: old reviews are available by
anonymous ftp from math.princeton.edu, in pub/baezpapers.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

John Baez, one of the biggest failures of 20th and 21st century math, because he has such a big dumb loud mouth on math, yet cannot even acknowledge the Oval is slant cut in cone, not the ellipse.

On Saturday, January 30, 1993 at 12:57:11 AM UTC-6, john baez wrote:
> Here's this week's reading material. The first test will be in two
> weeks. :-)
> 1) On the Vassiliev Knot Invariants by Dror Bar-Natan, Harvard
> University ``pre-preprint.''
> I went to UC San Diego this week to give a talk, and the timing was
> nice, because Dror Bar-Natan was there. He is a student of Witten who
> has started from Witten's ideas relating knot theory and quantum field

Here is an example of a complete fool and con-artist of mathematics, John Baez. A fool because he knows in his heart of hearts that Calculus is the most important part of mathematics. He knows also that calculus is geometry, for he cannot hide and run from that fact. Yet, he spends his entire life in mathematics and never tries to prove the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, FTC, with a GEOMETRICAL PROOF. Is this ignorance and stupidity on the part of John Baez or is he fundamentally incapable of ever training his attention and focus on a geometrical proof of FTC. And this obnoxious tendency of failures of mathematics to wade and waddle with insignificant worthless math of Knot invariants --- WHILE THE most pressing singular need of mathematics is Do A Geometry Proof of FTC, for it cleans the entire house of mathematics-- and go forward from there.

Yes, more people reading AP because John Baez and his troop of run and hide con artists of math of Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, John Stillwell, Thomas Hales, Jill Pipher, Ken Ribet are at the con art fakery of math, not the truth of mathematics with their:

a) refusal to acknowledge calculus is geometry and thus requires a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

b) Oval is the slant cut in single cone, never ellipse

c) Boole got all 4 of his connectors truth table wrong, worst being AND at TFFF when it truly is TTTF so we do not end up with 2 OR 1=3 with AND as subtraction

d) Natural Logarithm with base 2.71... has nothing to do with Y = 1/x for the Ln(1.00005) equals exactly 0.00005. A case of the logic fallacy that 1/x comes close, but you have the wrong function. And this fallacy of "coming close but no relationship" is seen again in the Andrew Wiles and Ken Ribet obnoxious claim that "elliptic curvers relate to counting numbers when they never did so".

So, failures of mathematics, Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, Jill Pipher, John Stillwell, Ken Ribet, run , run, and hide for you cannot do proper correct math and only can do run and hide.

1> More people reading AP's newsgroup than sci.math for math science.
2> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
>
> SCI.MATH FAQ, 20Sep2021// Usenet science dead, but AP's newsgroup up and running well--
>
> Today's topic-- how AP is correcting the definition of Natural Logarithm base 2.71... for the Y= 1/x has no relation to the equiangular logarithmic spiral. See AP's 203rd book of science.
>
> Take a look at the only pure science newsgroup, free of spammers, block-spam, and police drag net spam, free of stalkers.
>
> The only thing worth discussing in sci.math and to shift the momentum of the entire Math Community to the TRUTH OF MATHEMATICS is the painful having to throw out cranks and crackpots of mathematics-- Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John Stillwell, Jill Pipher, Ken Ribet, and many others who refuse to recognize the single most important math of our times is a GEOMETRY PROOF OF THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS, for in doing such, it cleans out mathematics just like scrubbing and vacuuming to clean out our houses is a necessary function in going forward. And the above listed math fools are trying everything in their power to keep math entrenched in their stupidity.
>
> Another item of huge concern is the correction of the Oval as the slant cut in Conic Sections, not the ellipse, and we can see how mindless and idiotic is the ship of state of mathematics, when the above list of failed mathematicians even refuses to correct such a simple error.
>
> Also, a third item which reveals that most math professors are good at calculations but mostly mindless fools of logic or just making a proof of mathematics, for all of the above listed fools of math still preach 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction. All because their tiny pea brained minds of logic can never understand how Boole screwed up on truth tables and that AND is never TFFF but always TTTF. Yet the above math fools use 2 OR 1= 3 every day in all their proofs of mathematics.
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
>
> XXXXXXXXXXX
>
> Principles of sci.math
>
> 1) Above all, do math in sci.math, for at the end of the day, end of the year, end of a life, it is the math that you do in sci.math that only counts.
>
> 2) When doing math in sci.math and talking to someone else that is seriously doing math with you-- be polite.
>
> 3) Most posters degenerate into ad hominem attackers. Reread (1).
>
> 4) Sci.math is open to all, sadly, to even those who never do math in sci.math, but the openness is a blessing in disguise, because the openess more often than not, gets at the truth of science that has been corrupted by other scientists. And sci.math is self-policing, meaning that if you continue to piss and poop, (like Jeff Relf offtopic in sci.physics) if you continue to piss and poop in sci.math, the others who seriously do math in sci.math will self police the miscreant out. For offtopic spammers like Relf is no better than a person invited to dinner and instead of using the bathroom, shits in the middle of the dining room floor.
>
>
> 5) Prime Minister Boris Johnson & President Joe Biden, please call off your police agencies and FBI, CIA, Mi5, Mi6 of their daily "police drag net spam" in sci.physics and sci.math, and leave those two newsgroups completely alone to do just physics and math. Totally inappropriate of govt agencies to ruin sci.math and sci.physics, you may as well have your agents in all church ceremonies applying drag net spam. The spammer "__" is never appropriate in sci.math or sci.physics, nor is the Stonehenge freak, or any of the other drag net spammers. We all thank the USA and British and other governments and agencies like CERN for inventing Usenet, but please, do not destroy what you built, with police drag net spam. Adhere to the tenet, that a forum sci.physics and sci.math are specifically devoted to physics and math, not to a govt bureaucracy chasing after criminals and terrorists with their highly flamed rhetoric and loud noises in sci.math, sci.physics.
>
> 6) Criminal-Stalking is defined as constant attacking of another person's character exclusive of science content in his/her threads for more than 1 year. In the case of criminal stalking the attackee, can just shred the attackers post and repost. For stalking is not science, nor academics nor debate nor discussion. Stalking is insanity and criminal behavior.
>
> AP writes: AP no longer tolerates any Criminal Stalker and thus shreds his attack and spits the byproduct back into the lap of the stalker.
>
> XXXXXXXXX
>
> Too much religion spam in sci.math lately with Amine doing the spamming. Take it to a religion newsgroup Amine, not sci.math.
>
>
> ***New news***
>
> Stripping college degrees.
>
> AP argues that college degrees are serious business and a holder should wear his/her degree proudly throughout the rest of their lives. AP argues that the Internet has been a new window on academics, and this new window shines a light on the fact that many receive college degrees but should never have been given one, Earle Jones, Dan Christensen, John Gabriel, Zelos Malum, Jan Burse, Kibo Parry Moroney. And their degrees from colleges should be made "null and void".
>
> The Internet has become a new testing arena for all students across the world, and if you screw up badly in the Internet, should mean, no final degree from college, or the nullification of an existing degree.
>
> College Degrees in science, every single one of them, should be seen as serious business and held to the highest standards. If anyone wears their college degree in science that puts shame on science, should have their degree made null and void. Such as being a professor yet unwilling to be vaccinated. John Gabriel, BWR, Earle Jones, Kibo Parry M., Dan Christensen, Zelos Malum, Markus Klyver, Jan Burse if any has a degree in science and engineering , should have their degrees made null and void. I decree it.
>
> The null and void is not a single incident but years and years of "spamming mistakes". All of the above have been spamming their mistakes for 10 years or more. They should not have a degree from any college in science or engineering.
>
> The education system needs a means of nullification as well as the -- passing out of degrees.
>
>
>
> XXXXXXXXX
>
>
> Archimedes Plutonium wrote in reply to leading mathematician of Nederlands Klyver:
> Sep 8, 2021, 2:30 PM
> to sci.math (on a good day when the first 15 posts are not all about spammer Gabriel)
>
> Banning the John Gabriel- Zelos Malum actor-acting con-math show from sci.math.
> 3k views
>
>
> Gabriel is lead actor, but joined in by Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Kibo Parry M, Earle Jones with his logo picture of phallus in the mouth in daytime (Earle is a X-rated actor and parental guidance urged). At night time joined in by B-rated actors Zelos (bozo) Malum, Markus Klyver (drop kicked from Sweden to Dutch Netherlands).
>
> PURPOSE: Have 15 worthless scree threads of Gabriel to be on the front page of sci. math constantly flooding sci.math and thus, taking over sci.math by that mindless worthless twit of John Gabriel. South Africa has no acting school industry like Bollywood or Hollywood and so gutter ghetto what is commonly called in parts of USA as "white trash" losers like Gabriel has to make due by acting in sci.math and destroying the lifeblood of sci.math.
>
> Mommy, can Gabriel cause cancer? No, I don't want you reading his posts.
>
> Gabriel was kicked out of every Internet outlet he ever had the sorry attendance of meeting. And a whole entire industry in computer social media was created, surrounding Gabriel, to disarm and cast off whereever Gabriel treaded his foots in. One only has to see how many YouTube movies had to be sterilized and sanitized after Gabriel had been kicked out of YouTube, worse than having to take bleach and sterilize furniture and floor from viral pandemics so the house pets of cats and dogs could return in our lives.
>
> Sci.math is Gabriel's last stronghold of play acting.
>
> XXXXXXXX
>
> Solution for block spam such as "hahaha". Ban them forever from the newsgroup after 2 warnings, if they do it again-- lifetime ban from sci.math and sci.physics.
>
> Solution for Block Spam "ay1" with yellow emoji faces-- pull plug on entire ISP // SCI.MATH FAQ 2Sep2021
>
> Troubles with Block Spam-- 15 screes of b.s. flooding all at once. Solution, pull the plug on entire ISP, even if an entire country where the spam emanates. And give time to our engineers to craft a U shaped funnel that the spam shit emanates but funneled back into the mouthes of the spamming jackarses. Also fitted with a baby bib for the insane.
>
> I am contemplating emailing Larry Page and Sergey Brin to set their finest engineers to work on a U funnel that reroutes this mindless spam from entering sci.physics and sci.math. The email should reach Larry's and Sergey's desk faster than the pony express.
>
>
> XXXXXXXXX
>
> The ugliness of a "gang Actor-spam in sci.math".
>
> In the latest FAQ of sci.math, we include the horrible behavior of Play Actor Spam by John Gabriel and his buddies Zelos Malum, Markus, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Kibo Parry M. where Gabriel fills up sci.math with 15 threads and waits for Dan to add a repetitive scree, then Jan Burse, then at nighttime for Zelos to add a one liner. PURPOSE of this spam-- to keep Gabriel 15 threads a Constant fixture, all day long, all night long as a permanent scree on page one every day of the year, and push all other posts into 2nd 3rd or hinter pages of sci.math.
>
> And the worst part of that story, they are paid indirectly via USA NSF and dept of Education, paying World std Kibo Parry, who then divvies out the money to his actors John Gabriel (all has to be confirmed of these allegations by a honest investigative reporter at least to the standards of Wikipedia which broke the story of the NSF link decades ago.)
>
>
> Sonnet
>
> To every life there has to be an end;
> Even for such life with no science brain at all.
> You, pea-brain, will follow that brain dead trend.
> When after fifty worthless years you fall.
> Will there be any style to honor you?
> For your mindless foolish reckless attack?
> You cackling ad hominem wretched hack
> Have less worth than a crackpot full of shit-stew.
>
> Yet there has been design in your making.
> Worthlessness escapes the limits of time.
> At last there will be worth from your being
> When soil does get enriched by your slime.
> Your worthless body freed from worthless mind
> Will at last to the dear good Earth be kind.
>
> AB + AP, poem copyrights
>
> XXXXXXXXXX
>
> The Daily Spammer, a disgruntled lugnut who daily wants to piss and poop on the world.
> Usually it is the same person with a different fake name.
>
> Tonight in sci.math it is Animn Elo.
>
> They hate the world, they hate themselves and they show it by spamming sci.math.
>
> XXXXXXXXXXXX
>
> Today's LIKELY govt drag net spammers in sci.math-- Amine. Likely FBI, CIA, Mi5, Mi6, and other govt agencies that give a shit, a shit about sci.math and overrunning sci.math.
>
> Amine police drag net & religion posts in sci.math is spam and abuse.
>
>
> XXXXXXXXX
>
>
>
>
> SCI.MATH FAQ and SCI. PHYSICS FAQ, although I personally remember the FAQ routinely posted to sci.math in 1993-1999 from Univ Waterloo in Canada, and from Scott I Chase from LBL dot gov in sci.physics.
>
>
> Snapshot History of Usenet's sci.physics and sci.math, and why it is almost dead, not as dead as sci.chem, but approaching it, save for a few individuals such as AP, and others. Others who care more about truth, than about money and prejudice and opinion, and mindless sentiment and sex orientation.
>
> AP cannot afford to lose sci.physics and sci.math because most of his new ideas after 1993 were all recorded and archived in sci.math and sci.physics.
>
> The death of sci.chem and so many other newsgroups can be blamed on a govt interference pattern of paying for stalkers, and police drag net spam. As if doing physics in sci.physics is a nuisance to others doing stalking and police drag net spam.
>
> Sci.chem is a dead newsgroup. Sci.physics and sci.math are almost dead newsgroups where stalkers fill each thread of those doing physics in sci.physics or math in sci.math, paid stalkers to demonize authors and after the end of the day, all of the posts are flushed off into 2nd or 3rd or 4th page by government block spam, police drag net spam to get all posts off the front page. Here is an example of block-flush-spam found almost daily in sci.physics. The purpose of which is to flush all posts into 2nd or 3rd page-- out of sight, out of mind of posts that have physics content.
>
>
> unread,
> i take back what i said previous forgive me im sick i ccry
> How are you ?
> 7:30 AM
> 
> _'s profile photo
> _
> ,
> He Llo
> 2
> unread,
> i take back whta i said previosu forgive me im sick i cry
> How are you ?
> 7:29 AM
> 
> _'s profile photo
> _
> ,
> He Llo
> 2
> unread,
> in 1999 they called me a monster but i thought i was a good monster like for example the monsters of rocknroll>>and not a bad monster>>what did i do to be a monster?i dont know, its because somthing she told them that i dont know and never will cause i wasnt any mmonster
> 7:29 AM
> 
> _'s profile photo
> _
> ,
> He Llo
> 2
> unread,
> in 1999 when i was a kid my senses didnt detect the monstruos proportion that i was confrontated aka with the rockstars >> if i was anonymous there woudnt be any problem cause i could handle it cause i had the controls>>but she stole my controls from me and made me contract freeze and they wanted me to explain without me having hte controls>>she caught me>>and i turned to crap>>she wanetd to steal my freedom and she succeeded
> 7:29 AM
> 
> _'s profile photo
> _
> ,
> He Llo
> 2
> unread,
> i take back what i said preivous forgive me im sick i cry
> 
> Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
> Archimedes Plutonium
> 9:46 AM (1 hour ago)
> 
> 
> 
> to
> On Monday, August 9, 2021 at 9:17:14 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 11:27:39 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > 6-SCI.PHYSICS FAQ, 8Aug2021// Usenet science dead, but AP's newsgroup up and running--
> > > For details see:
> > > https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> > >
>
> Zelos Malum is doing a block-flush-spam over in sci.math, and every night he spits up as spam every one of Gabriel's spam that morning and loads the block of 15 threads onto sci.math to push everyone off the front pages.
>
> Not only does Zelos Malum do a Block-Flush-Spam every night by regurgitating every one of John Gabriel's daytime spam, usually a block of 15 threads, but now we have Markus over in Europe doing Block-Flush-Spam.
> So they do all sorts of attacks, attack your personal thread, and in conjunction, block-flush-spam to get your thread over onto page 2 or 3 hinterlands.
> Many a poster is a juvenile delinquent who never grew up, and thinks Usenet is another game toy, where you have to battle authors to see if they go away, with your attacks. Some mothers in Europe must be teaching their bad naughty child-- go play with Usenet, to get them out of their hair, but into the hairs of authors in sci.math and sci.physics, just like Markus.
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 3:02:50 PM UTC-5, markus...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I'm quite sure Wiles is perfectly aware about the proof of FTC.
>
> And now we have not only Zelos Malum misfit repeating all 15 John Gabriel threads everyday of the year, but we have the new misfit of Markus Klyver repeating the misfit Malum 15 threads.
>
> Repeating or repetition is one of the strongest yet annoying weapons used in Usenet.
>
>
> There is a old saying, that a camel is a horse designed by a government committee. And after observing Usenet for almost 30 years now, and how the US government built Usenet in 1993 and how the USA govt then destroyed Usenet, we can safely say "A ashened dung heap of nuked out husk is a Camel of a Horse, once US government gets finished with it."
>
>
> Sci.chem is a dead newsgroup. With only police drag net spam occupying 90% of the posts. You can easily tell police drag net spam-- always off topic, and incendiary, and full of references. Danger-- those references are likely to be viruses to hack into your computer.
>
> The USA government created Usenet in late 1980s, circa 1989 and I started to post 1993. About 90% of the posts were authored by edu dot addresses, harvard, nwu, berkeley and many colleges and universities. Today it is rare to see any edu dot address. Whenever I pull up a thread of mine in the early 1990s they are loaded with dot edu addresses. So what caused them to all flee? It was that the government of USA that invented Usenet started to pay stalkers to pester, harass, and cause to flee authors with their drumbeat of hate and stalking spam, which after the end of the day would be flushed off the front pages with more govt spam of drag net or flush-spam. So the govt created Usenet, in early 1990s and by 2000 was on a cruise to bruise and destroy Usenet. By 2021, only a enclave of posters in sci.math and sci.physics is keeping those two newsgroups still alive.
>
> Some had warned in 1990s to use filters when reading sci.physics or sci.math. Filter out all bad pests and stalkers. Trouble is, the stalkers turned away dot edu authors and by 1999 most colleges and university authors were heading for the exits.
>
> The vital reason AP cannot leave sci.physics and sci.math is because most everyone of my new ideas of science was posted to sci.physics and sci.math and many of those posts are seen in any one of my so far published books on Kindle Amazon. In the two years of 2019 - 2021 I managed to publish 150 books and working on my 151st book of TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 1st year college.
>
> It is safe to say the only fully functioning Usenet newsgroup of pure science, with no spam is AP's newsgroup. A place where almost all is pure science, seldom "people talk".
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
>
> Google newsgroups have abuse monitoring buttons and abuse report. But when the abuse comes from the USA govt itself, there is nothing Google can do.
>
> And, much of that police drag net spam is experimental spam, and what I mean is they test out to see how well and easy they can get into your computer should you dare click on one of their reference sites. Sort of test out "how to hack" should you click on their spam posts.
>
> This is what sci.chem looks like at the moment, a bombed out shell husk of police drag net spam. And the only reason sci.physics and sci.math are still functioning and do not look like sci.chem, are the efforts of a few people who care about sci.physics and sci.math.
>
> FBInNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> Economist John Maynard Keynes Said Whites Had The Right To KILL Non-Whites
> Aug 1
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> , …
> Nomen Nescio
> 4
> unread,
> EVIL WHITE CHRISTIAN THIEVES "deliberately diminished" Greatest Mathematical Contributions by Indians
> Jul 26
> 
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> USA UK Aus Canada govts have been LYING to public - Ex-MI5 Microwave Scientist Barrie Trower
> Jul 23
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> Fibonacci: I loved Indian Mathematics to such an extent above all others that I completely devoted myself to it
> Jul 17
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> The Magneto-Plasma Cosmology of the Ṛgveda - Alternative to Big Bang Theory
> Jul 17
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> Re: Trump's lawsuit (WHITE FILTH spend their entire lives GOSSIPING while CIA, NSA is secretly CHIPPING them with MIND CONTROL CHIPS)
> Jul 11
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> MERCILESSLY MASSACRE THE CIA, NSA n FBI AGENTS LIKE FUCKING PIGS for SECRETLY CHIPPING Amrikkkans with MIND CONTROL CHIPS
> Jul 6
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> The VEDA of PHYSICS: Reconciling the Observer and the Observed
> Jul 4
> 
>
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> MASSACRE CIA, FBI, NSA agents like FUCKING PIGS for SECRETLY CHIPPING americans with MIND INVASIVE CHIPS and TORTURING with DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS
> Jun 30
> 
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer's profile photo
> FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
> unread,
> How INDIAN LOGIC played a role in the CREATION OF MODERN LOGIC, which is at the BASIS OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
>
> Best FAQ ever written in Usenet once Alex Lopez-Ortiz of Univ. Waterloo FAQ stopped due to paid for stalkers.
>
> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet in AP's newsgroup, for sci.physics and sci.math was sold by USA govt to a gang of stalkers, who pester everyone as they now own sci.physics, and the USA govt of NSF and dept of Educ probably laughing their arse off as the stalkers harass and pester everyone. In the 1980s we had fraud waste abuse of $900. toilet seats from the government. The govt learns quickly and now their fraud waste and abuse is pay Kibo Parry M, Jan Burse, Dan Christensen perhaps $100 per stalker post, providing everyone in USA govt entertainment in their soda coffee break at Washington DC. "Look, kibo just harassed AP with two more emoji's of "shit for brains". The Master in Dr. Who: ha ha ha,... ha ha ha....
>
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
>
> Sci. Math FAQ history
>
> From 1993 onwards to sometime around 1996 SCI.MATH FAQs were admininstered by Univ Waterloo in Canada, warning young students and newcomers of what to expect in sci.math. It worked well. And I would have liked it to be the first post permanently in sci.math. And it was done "for free". Their Warnings to students and newcomers were excellent, warning them of trust little of what you see in sci.math, sci.physics. And this is all that you ever need for Warnings. You never need paid for stalkers, which destroys a newsgroup.
>
> But then corruption and fraud entered sci.math and sci.physics, for when money can be made from something, easy money, then it is not long before a new arrangement is made. So instead of a "for free FAQ". Some persons convinced the USA govt to pay stalkers to go around and pester authors 24-7-365.
>
> And here is where a awful choice was likely made. A choice of hiring Kibo Parry M. of World std as noted by Wikipedia reference to the NSF, National Science Foundation. That they likely (we need investigative journalist to unearth the facts) hired Kibo Parry M, ___not knowing or not caring___ that he was Gay (we have to prove this as a Wikipedia standards of journalism) and by hiring him to stalk Usenet sci.math and sci.physics, he brings along with him (unknown to NSF at the time) brings along with him a full army of gay followers and warriors ready to do battle on Kibo's behalf in anticipation of a future "bedwarmer payback". Followers that laughed at every corny joke uttered by Kibo, So as they hire Kibo Parry M to stalk AP, then AP is not a one on one with Kibo attacks, no, AP is faced with a army of Kibo zombies.
>
> On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 7:18:40 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote in sci.math:
> sex motivation in science Re: curious, just curious-- is there a numbers correlation between percentage of stalkers and homosexuality? Re: Psychology behind the mental disorder of stalking-- Michael Moroney, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Jan Bielawski
>
> On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 5:21:29 PM UTC-5, Me(Franz) wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 11:31:26 PM UTC+2, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >
> >> I am not suggesting that the 12 stalkers are 12 homosexuals.
> (Franz) > I am not suggesting that the 12 stalkers are 12 [male --me] homosexuals.
> >
> (Franz)> I'm sure they are. That's why they are called /12 Angry Men/!
>
> Well, this explains a lot about many posters in sci.math and sci.physics, for they are not in science for truth but in science to meet and partner up. And explains the loyalty and ferocity of hate posts by those 12, having no truth value. Explains why Franz keeps posting a total fake ellipse, because of his bedwarmer approval.
>
> In another thread I discuss how "money corrupts science" but looking here, I need to consider how sex orientation corrupts the truth of science. So that we must ask-- is black hole acceptance due in large part to homosexual community wanting a black hole agenda. Is the Big Bang theory a homosexual favorite. Is the Appel & Haken in 4 color mapping, the Hales Kepler Packing, the Wiles FLT, all due to homosexual community favoritism, rather than any truth content.
>
> So if Franz can post 100,000 times his fake conic ellipse b.s. all because he wants a bedwarmer, rather than the truth of science. We have to explore how much more of science is a sexual preference rather than reasoned truth.
>
> A stupid decision was made by USA government sometime in the late 1990s to hire-- by the govt.-- paid for stalkers to stalk sci.math and sci.physics, in turn destroying those newsgroups and all of science on Usenet.
>
> Not only did the stalkers invade every thread of their targeted victim, but there was a hidden agenda a "hidden sci.math and a hidden sci.physics", like a different channel, in which posts that were free of the stalkers would be channelled into this sci.math and sci.physics, so that the stalking made a "no see um" of of the targeted victim. A form of censoring. So that no-one would see a post of AP, once the stalkers had made a reply into a AP thread.
>
> Much of the stalking comes out of std World ISP, with a fake name of Michael Moroney and many other fake names, used by Kibo Parry.
>
> ---quoting Wikipedia ---
> Controversy
> Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
> --- end quote ---
>
> NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
>
> Dr. Panchanathan , present day
> France Anne Cordova
> Subra Suresh
> Arden Lee Bement Jr.
> Rita R. Colwell
> Neal Francis Lane
> John Howard Gibbons 1993
>
> Barry Shein, kibo parry std world
> Jim Frost, Joe "Spike" Ilacqua
>
> And how much of this paid stalkers, is paid for by the USA dept of Education? We need investigative journalists to figure this out.
>
> We need investigative news journalists to see how much money the govt USA via NSF or dept of Educ is enriching the pockets of Kibo Parry M., Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, and a team of allies to stalk sci.math and sci.physics. Is it in the millions of dollars? Are they paid more to stalk under a NSF grant than actual professors of math and physics are paid at MIT or CalTech to actually teach math and physics? Will the NSF hire Kibo Parry M, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse to wipe the arse of staff at NSF as they visit the toilet, for they enjoy stalkers throwing turds throughout sci.math and sci.physics? And will that be paid for in millions of dollars also.
>
> USA NSF---Sethuraman Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Ulvestad, Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey, Scott Stanley
>
> USA dept Educ, Cindy Marten, deputy
>
> And the extreme stalking by Canadian Dan Christensen.
> Canada's NSF-- Francois-Philippe Champagne, Ted Hewitt, Martha Crago, Frederic Bouchard, Cinthia Duclos, Normand Labrie
>
> Investigative reporter needs to find out why Alex Lopez-Ortiz of Univ. Waterloo that had a nice, well-worked FAQ in early 1990s in Warning young students and newcomers that they will see all sorts of posts and to believe few if any of those posts. Why that FAQ disappeared in late 1990s, leaving only stalkers all over Usenet.
>
> The FAQ worked really well and were "for free". It gave the proper Warnings to young students and newcomers that they would find all manner of posts and to believe very little of what they read because of the free-style nature of posts. Only I would have preferred they remain a permanent fixture of the very first post in sci.physics or sci.math.
>
> So the journalist needs to investigate the corruption of where we are talking about a lot of money, perhaps millions squandered in paying the likes of stalkers Kibo Parry M, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, to stalk day and night, year after year for 28 years now. When before Alex at Univ of Waterloo was posting for free-- the Warning. And now with stalkers, pestering authors to try to drive authors out.
>
> Why give up a FAQ to pay millions for stalkers that ruin sci.physics and sci.math, just simply ruin and destroy it. And turn sci.math and sci.physics down to their level of idiocy-- Kibo Parry-- 938 is 12% short of 945, or Dan Christensen with 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction of the error filled Boole logic.
>
> When sci.math and sci.physics operated beautifully with a FAQ posted from Univ Waterloo in the early 1990s. Why change, unless big, free easy money could be had.
>
> So we need a investigative journalist to see where the govt fraud and corruption entered into the destruction of sci.math and sci.physics when a "for free guidance" was offered in a FAQ in early 1990s, where the corruption of wasting millions of dollars to pay some clinically obese stalkers Kibo and others sitting on their arse --all day long attacking posters.
>
> And one has to investigate on whether John Gabriel was a stalker himself who would spam sci.math almost every day filling the board with 10 or more posts, whether Gabriel was some sort of "lure and bait" for stalkers Dan Christensen, Kibo Parry M, to say to NSF Dr. Panchanathan "see, you need us to stalk because of guys like Gabriel, now give us a 2 million pay rise".
>
> AP has the hunch that Gabriel is a actor in cohort with Kibo and Dan and Jan and especially Zelos Malum who spams a 15 thread scree every night for years into Gabriel threads just to push everyone else off the front page. The Malum pathetic one liners such as "and why does one need to do it geometrically?" Refering to AP's call for a geometry proof of calculus.
>
> South Africa has no Hollywood for actor guilds, and so John Gabriel has become a sci.math actor, with his buddies Zelos Malum, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse and Kibo Parry M. play acting in sci.math, posting 15 spam screed threads much of the material a revised copy of whatever AP is doing in math, but much of it a disdain and mockery of others and AP, and famous mathematicians like Euler. But do not be fooled by Zelos or Dan or Jan jumping all over John Gabriel for their attacks of Gabriel were all arranged ahead of time. They are all one and the same gang of attacking spamming stalkers, paid for, sadly, probably, and this needs investigator journalism, paid for by USA NSF and dept of education. They paid Kibo to stalk authors, and Kibo brought a gang of gays with him, some of them actors like Gabriel (all to be investigated by journalists.)
>
> In the wake of stalking, the USA government then used the sci.math and sci.physics as stomping grounds for police-drag-net-spam. One merely has to take a peek inside of sci.chem and see it is a bombed out shell of a husk of nothing but police drag net spam, so bad was sci.chem, that Dr. Panchanathan mad at how overwhelmed sci.chem had been destroyed ordering one of the stalkers to daily go into sci.chem with a dumb insipid question of chemistry, just to pretend sci.chem still had some "life" with someone of the stalkers posing a chemistry question, just to pretend it is not 100% bombed out of existence.
>
> The Master in Dr. Who:: ha, ha, ha,,ha,ha.....ha,ha ha, hee,hee,hee, hee hee.
>
> So what AP is going to do, is restore science newsgroups from the awful clutches of ignorant National Science Foundation Dr. Panchanathan's paid for stalkers and daily police drag net spam abominations.
>
> AP needs to do this for most of all New True Science came from sci.physics and sci.math. People dull dumb and dirt ignorant people of science cannot stomach change and truth of science, and their reaction is predictable-- destroy the truth of science whatever means possible.
>
> I am going to restore a daily FAQ to sci.physics and sci.math, until NSF Dr. Panchanathan grows up and his dept. grows up and furnishes a FAQ for sci.math and sci.physics. And stops and halts all payments to stalkers and stops and halts police drag net spam. Until then, AP takes over that job.
>
> Swiss fraud waste abuse of taxpayer money 100franc per stalker post--
> On Friday, July 30, 2021 at 5:35:41 PM UTC-5, burs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Archimedes Plutonium should be thrown in jail
> > for his willful criminal behavior. The criminal
>
> Swiss government: Walter Thurnherr, Guy Parmelin, Ignazio Cassis
>
> Unclear how the fraud waste abuse money flows, whether USA-NSF pays the Swiss for Jan Burse stalking directly, or whether some other flow for stalking, or, none at all. But the stalking has been constant for 10 years.
>
> NSF fraud waste abuse of taxpayer money $100 per stalker post--
>
> USA--NSF Dr. Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Ulvestad, Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey, Scott Stanley.
>
> ---quoting Wikipedia ---
> Controversy
> Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public Internet access on "an experimental basis."
> --- end quote ---
>
> ETH Zurich
>
> Paul Biran, Marc Burger, Patrick Cheridito, Manfred Einsiedler, Paul Embrechts, Giovanni Felder, Alessio Figalli, Norbert Hungerbuhler, Tom Ilmanen, Horst Knorrer, Emmanuel Kowalski, Urs Lang, Rahul Pandharipande, Richard Pink, Tristan Riviere, Dietmar Salamon, Martin Schweizer, Mete Soner, Michael Struwe, Benjamin Sudakov, Alain Sznitman, Josef Teichmann
> Wendelin Werner, Thomas Willwacher
>
> Zurich ETH, physics dept
> Charalampos Anastasiou, Niklas Beisert, Adrian Biland,
> Gianni Blatter, Marcella Carollo, Christian Degen, Leonardo Degiorgi, Gunther Dissertori, Klaus Ensslin,
> Tilman Esslinger, Jerome Faist, Matthias Gaberdiel,
> Aude Gehrmann-De Ridder, Vadim Geshkenbein, Christophorus Grab, Michele Graf, Jonathan Home,
> Roland Horisberger, Sebastian Huber, Thomas Markus Ihn, Atac Imamoglu, Steven Johnson, Ursula Keller, Klaus Kirch, Simon Lilly, Joel Mesot, Renatto Renner,
> Andre Rubbia, Werner Schmutz, Thomas Schulthess, Manfred Sigrist, Hans-Arno Synal, Matthias Troyer, Andreas Vaterlaus, Rainer Wallny, Andreas Wallraff,
> Werner Wegscheider, Audrey Zheludev, Oded Zilberberg
>
> University Bern
> Christian Leumann, Walter Benjamin, Emil Theodor Kocher, Kurt Wuthrich, Friedrich Durrenmatt, Daniel Vassella, Rene Fasel, Mani Matter
>
> AP restoring a FAQ to SCI.PHYSICS and Directing all traffic to the only **active pure science newsgroup**
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
>
>
> What AP is going to do, if Usenet continues to hire stalkers paid for by NSF, and continues to go without a FAQ and continues to fill up the newsgroups with police drag net spam, is AP will single handedly restore a FAQ to sci.physics and sci.math, and --redirect traffic-- to the only functional sci.physics and sci.math newsgroup now available in Usenet--> the only newsgroup doing nothing but pure science--->
>
> Which was more corrupt, the stalkers Kibo, Dan and Jan or was NSF the lead corruptors, that would make Usenet sci.math and sci.physics a bombed out shell of a husk.
> 
> So we see here how USA, NSF
> Sethuraman Panchanathan, F. Fleming Crim, Dorothy E Aronson, Brian Stone, James S Ulvestad, Rebecca Lynn Keiser, Vernon D. Ross, Lloyd Whitman, John J. Veysey, Scott Stanley
>
> And how Canada NSF,
> Canada's NSF-- Francois-Philippe Champagne, Ted Hewitt, Martha Crago, Frederic Bouchard, Cinthia Duclos, Normand Labrie
>
> Instructs their paid for stalkers Kibo Parry M. and Dan Christensen. To pick a victim, selected by NSF, then pester that victim in every one of his posts with hate spew, whether anagrams or mockery or swear words.
>
> What we do not see is how much money is slided under the table for each of those stalk posts. Whether in cash or in license fees to even operate std World or in grants hidden from view and given obscure titles pretending to research something in internet behavior.
>
> So when was the last time that Alex Lopez-Ortiz posted his sci.math FAQ which did a perfectly swell job of WARNING to young students and newcomers, warning that you should believe only a fraction of what you read and that sci.math is coated in cranks crackpots and worthless stalkers like Kibo and Dan teaching 938 is 12% short of 945 and that 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction due to error filled Boole logic.
>
> So we do not see how much of taxpayers dollars is going for the likely-clinically-obese stalkers of Kibo Parry M., Dan Christensen, Jan Burse munching on chocolate bonbons sitting on their arse all day long spewing hatred. We do not see if their post nets a $100 per post spew or even more. So that they are paid thousand dollars a day, leaving the poor college professor who actually does teach math and physics, with a hundred dollars a day.
>
> We need an investigative journalist to find out if the corrupt Kibo and Dan sought for the NSF to extract this lavish lifestyle career, or whether NSF sought for someone to stalk as a career.
>
>
>
>
> y z
> | /
> | /
> |/______ x
>
> More people reading and viewing AP's newsgroup than viewing sci.math, sci.physics. So AP has decided to put all NEW WORK, to his newsgroup. And there is little wonder because in AP's newsgroups, there is only solid pure science going on, not a gang of hate spewing misfits blighting the skies.
>
> In sci.math, sci.physics there is only stalking hate spew along with Police Drag Net Spam of no value and other than hate spew there is Police drag net spam day and night.
>
> I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of stalkers and spammers, Police Drag Net Spam that floods each and every day, book and solution manual spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, churning imbeciles, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers. And the taxpayer funded hate spew stalkers who ad hominem you day and night on every one of your posts.
>
> There is no discussion of science in sci.math or sci.physics, just one long line of hate spewing stalkers followed up with Police Drag Net Spam (easy to spot-- very offtopic-- with hate charged content). And countries using sci.physics & sci.math as propaganda platforms, such as tampering in elections with their mind-rot.
>
> Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
> Archimedes Plutonium

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Univ Toronto Dr. Davis was old school, where they thought sci.math was just a "stealing ground" see something you like and steal away.

Baez & AP complaining of the rampant stealing from Usenet, such as Univ Toronto Chandler Davis as editor of Mathematical Intelligencer. Did Davis drive that magazine into the ground with his stealing ways?

On Saturday, January 30, 1993 at 12:57:11 AM UTC-6, john baez wrote:

> Here's this week's reading material. The first test will be in two
> weeks. :-)

> I have worn myself out trying to do justice

Chandler Davis, Mathematical Intelligencer stealing AP's correction of Euclid's Infinitude of Primes Proof.


Kibo Parry M complaining of Chandler Davis of Mathematical Intelligencer stealing AP's Euclid Infinitude of Primes Proof.


Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo

Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
Nov 17, 2020, 5:40:41 PM (4 days ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe


Chandler Davis of University Toronto as editor of Mathematical Intelligencer. From around 1993 to early 2000, stealing AP's Usenet posted Correcting Euclid Infinitude of Primes Proof in sci.math, later published in his Correcting Math book.

My 14th published book

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
File Size: 2026 KB
Print Length: 722 pages
Publication Date: March 15, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQ2CXBY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled 
X-Ray: 
Not Enabled  

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




Comparing the stealing of Porat versus MitchR versus Chandler Davis of Math. Intelligencer magazine

Well it is easy to compare their stealing ways.

Porat would read a "good nice new idea", and really really like it. And so his reaction was to pop up in the author's thread and accuse that author of stealing the new idea from Porat. Such stealing behavior gets old very very fast for the original author.

MitchR stealing ways is less offensive, less in-your-face stealing than Porat, but none-the-less as aggravating. What MitchR does is scout around in sci.math and sci.physics for new ideas. Once he spots one, he rewords the new idea and posts his rewording in a new thread pretending he is the discoverer of a brand new idea of science. Actually, AP has met people like this in real life, where they listen to someone talk about a new idea and reword it so that they feel they have no need of footnoting or citing original source. For there are thousands of people who think that rewording a new idea gives them the right to call it "their new idea".

Chandler Davis when he was editor of Mathematical Intelligencer in Toronto Canada in the 1990s early 2000 printed a article on the mistakes in the Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof, not Chandler but two other authors. Trouble was, the article was almost a pure lifting, a stealing of AP's posts in sci.math over Euclid Infinitude of Primes. And I emailed Chandler asking for a correction page inclusion of my work in a future issue of the magazine. Turns out that Chandler was "stupid old school of thought" thinking that Usenet and Internet are just "for free to steal all you want". So, what AP ended up doing is publishing Chandler Davis's brash stealing of AP's work in AP's book. All that Chandler had to do was simply include a two line cite of Archimedes Plutonium in his magazine, but no, for I guess a thief is always a thief, and looking for a excuse.

So, what turned out in the case of Chandler Davis refusal to publish priority rights of intellectual property, that now, Chandler Davis is published in AP's book of stealing on the Internet. Fair sailing Chandler...

Dr. Chandler Davis when editor of Mathematical Intelligencer, steals the work of AP's Euclid Infinitude of Primes proof, work I had done in early 1990s and there Davis publishes my work under names of different authors in 2009. Davis and Thorp just have not accepted the idea that Internet is "not free stealing grounds".

Quoting from my book-- Theft & Stealing ideas of science in the era of the internet// Ways to prevent and combat stealing// Sociology series, book 10
by Archimedes Plutonium




Newsgroups: sci.physics, soc.history, sci.math
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archime...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 11:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Fri, Sep 9 2011 1:22 pm
Subject: Scardigli and arXiv, and QM of Titius-Bode rule priority? new book: #9 Usenet sci.newsgroups theft-without-proper-attribute

On Sep 9, 1:17 am, Archimedes Plutonium

<plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote:

(snipped in large part)

Now I need to shorten the title of this book and so far I have adopted
this as the title:
"Usenet sci.newsgroups theft-without-proper-attribute"
Maybe I can improve that even more, along the way
As mentioned often in this book, of the newness of the Internet and 
Usenet and that newness 
will create problems with the old media way of publishing science 
ideas. There were 
numerous problems in old media coverage of science, but when Usenet 
came around circa 1990, 
the proper attribute for new ideas had to be re-examined. And it left 
decades open of 
misappropriation of new ideas.
Now Mr Scardigli mentions above that he inserted a "errors corrected 
and more references cited" 
as a second edition to his first edition. I still do not see where he 
references Archimedes Plutonium 
Usenet posts to sci.physics on the Titius Bode Rule as quantum 
mechanics.
But what Mr. Scardigli has done by using a correction page to update, 
offers us a solution to 
the problem of "theft-without-proper-attribute." And this is what I 
tried to get Chandler Davis 
editor of Mathematical Intelligencer to do with his published article 
of "Prime Simplicity" of 2009 
was to include in a future correction page of Mathematical 
Intelligencer the name of Archimedes Plutonium 
with the referencing of my thousand or so Usenet posts on the subject 
for which I had priority.
So whereas the Usenet science newsgroups offers superior date-time- 
group for new ideas. The Usenet can be 
corrected of theft-by-improper-attribute by the insertion of the 
reference in a "Correction Page".
So that if Mr. Scardigli were to include Archimedes Plutonium, posts 
to sci.physics in a future correction page, then this episode is over 
with and ended. And if Chandler Davis with Mathematical Intelligencer 
in a future correction page of that magazine cites Archimedes 
Plutonium: posts to sci.math on Euclid Infinitude of Primes corrected, 
then that issue is over with.
So we begin to see the problem and it is a huge problem, and we begin 
to see a clearcut solution by authors, that they can correct priority 
rights through a Correction page citing those earlier sources.
Now I want to talk briefly about the opposite and rather insidious 
phenomenon that is occurring on Usenet as a publishing medium, that 
was there also in old media publishing but not so obnoxious and not so 
widespread. It is what can be considered the inverse of not including 
a reference to that of over-including a reference to the detriment of 
the source. What I am talking about is what has been dubbed as 
"bombing, Google bombing or 
search engine bombing." So that when you are reading a article about 
coal, you have reference to old articles written by Archimedes 
Plutonium to the planet Mars and whether Mars has coal.
Science before the Internet was worried about citing original sources. 
With the Internet a new problem arises 
where search engines are hyper-sensitive and will list references to 
authors for which the only element in common was a few words.
So in science, we still have the problem of proper citation to 
scientists with original ideas, but we also have a new problem on our 
hands of drowning authors of science with the pollution of search 
engine bombing 
on those authors. In a sense, this happened in old media science where 
a tabloid press would talk about a 
famous scientist, for which that scientist would rather that the 
tabloid never discussed him or his work, 
at all.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Looking for the PBS NOVA that did the saber tooth tiger, have not found it yet, but did find Eon transcript::
2m views
Subscribe


Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>

Jan 2, 2024, 11:28:11 PM (1 hour ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
I found the below Eon transcript and am thinking of including it with a Rewrite into my Smilodon book.

--- quoting Eon transcript ---
PBS Eons:: The Story of Saberteeth

Nothing had a smile like Smilodon.

This fearsome Ice Age cat, the size of a modern-day tiger, had a pair of fangs nearly 18 centimeters long.

And you know what?

Those giant teeth just might make a comeback.

As famous as Smilodon is, it was only the last and largest of the great sabertooths.

Ridiculously long canines had already been a trend for millions of years by the time Smilodon was prowling around, and scientists have only just begun to understand how sabertoothed carnivores used their dental weapons.

First things first, though - what does sabertooth actually mean?

Technically speaking, a sabertooth is simply any animal with extremely elongated canine teeth.

That's it!

And there have been all kinds of sabertoothed critters over the past quarter-billion years.

The very first one we know of is Tiarajudens, a goofy-looking protomammal from Brazil that dates back to the Permian Period, about 265 million years ago.

And over the eons, saberteeth have also shown up in herbivores like the strange, horned Uintatherium, primates like lemurs and baboons, and about 4 million years ago in the Pacific Northwest, there was even a species of sabertooth salmon.

But when we say "sabertooth", usually we're talking about the mammals who used their teeth not just to show off, but to slice and dice their prey.

And for that, we need to get acquainted with some rather pointy beasts.

Let's rewind back to the Eocene, about 45 million years ago.

Between then and now, there were basically three different kinds of terrifying, cat-like predators, each of which had evolved their own saberteeth.

The first were nimravids.

They looked a lot like cats, but they actually belonged on a totally different branch of the carnivore family tree.

And they were prickly customers.

Fossils show that these carnivores fought a lot, often biting each other on the face and around the eyes.

Now, fast forward to the Miocene Epoch, about 20 million years ago and you'll find barbourofelids another group of not-quite-cats Many of them, like Barbourofelis in North America, had long pockets in their jaws that their teeth could slot into when they closed their mouths.

Then came the true sabercats.

In the Pliocene Epoch there was the leggy, sprinting Homotherium, and more recently, in the Pleistocene, we find the famous Smilodon.

So from their own, separate starting points, the nimravids, the barbourofelids, and the true cats each wound up with its own type of sabertooth species.

This is a great example of convergent evolution, when different organisms develop the same trait independently of each other, because that's just what works The marine reptiles known as ichthyosaurs, for example, look a lot like sharks because that streamlined shape is just great for slicing through water.

And the same goes for flight -- both bats and pterosaurs developed wings made of leathery skin stretched out on long fingers.

But when it comes to saberteeth, the question is... why?

What made these teeth so ... cutting edge?

Well, there's been no shortage of theories about how sabertooths used their fangs.

One of the earliest ideas was that cats used them to penetrate the armor of Ice Age animals like giant armadillos and ground sloths.

It's like they were cats who were also their own can openers!

Other experts thought they used their fangs to stab, jumping on the back of a mammoth, say, and slamming their teeth into their prey.

There was even a suggestion that these cats were bloodsuckers!

One expert looked at the palate of Smilodon and thought its mouth may have been suited for drinking blood.

None of these ideas held up, though -- mostly because saber-shaped teeth were, in fact, incredibly fragile.

They were long, flat, and not very good at twisting or bending, as you can see in the many painful-looking broken sabers that have been found in the fossil record.

So the latest thinking is that, because their teeth were so fragile, sabercats were probably very picky eaters, and they had to time their bites very carefully.

This means that they didn't hunt like the cats we know today.

Lions and tigers don't slash or rip at their prey.

Instead they rely on what's called a throttling bite, which keeps the victim's mouth or windpipe closed until it suffocates.

Sabercats couldn't use a throttling bite.

So, paleontologists think these cats used their powerful arms to grapple their prey to the ground, and then unleashed a devastating shear bite to cut through the windpipe and blood vessels of the neck, or maybe open the belly of their prey.

If the initial bite didn't kill it, the prey would soon die of blood loss.

So, Smilodon probably hunted less like your house cat, and more like a great white shark, ambushing its prey in a powerful strike to cause massive damage.

Now, this might seem like a high-risk way to hunt, but it obviously worked!

Because, like we've already seen, saberteeth are one of evolution's greatest hits.

But if they're so great, what happened to them?

Well, paleontologists think that hunting in such a specialized way required large prey, like the camels and horses that used to be common in North America.

And when many of the megafauna died off at the end of the last Ice Age, the sabercats might have run out of food to eat.

But no one really knows.

The fact remains, by the time the last of the sabercats disappeared -- only about 8,000 years ago -- there had been some kind of sabertoothed predator on the planet somewhere for 40 million years!

So it only makes sense to consider the possibility that evolution will converge yet again on this winning design.

After all, if natural history has shown us anything it's that good body plans tend to show up over and over.

Today, there are over 40 species of cat, large and small, on the planet.

So, given a few million years and the right evolutionary nudge, we might still see a smile like Smilodon's again.

--- end quoting transcript ---

Yes AP will Rewrite the above, for the last thing we want to do in science, is keep phony and anti-science on the films and on the books.

AP

Looking for the PBS NOVA that did the saber tooth tiger, have not found it yet, but did find Eon transcript::

Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>

12:19 AM (1 hour ago)



to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Tuesday, January 2, 2024 at 11:28:11 PM UTC-6 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
I found the below Eon transcript and am thinking of including it with a Rewrite into my Smilodon book.

--- quoting Eon transcript ---
PBS Eons:: The Story of Saberteeth

Nothing had a smile like Smilodon.

This fearsome Ice Age cat, the size of a modern-day tiger, had a pair of fangs nearly 18 centimeters long.


AP:: I seriously doubt that proposition, saying instead the fangs were from a early walrus type of animal that started evolving in South America with small tiny tusks but as it slowly moved north, its tusks became larger and larger. And when cats prey on walruses, their tusks are left behind. A cat usually drags its prey to its den site, and if the cat dies in the den site, thus tusks become fossilized with the cat and mistaken by future paleontologists.


And you know what?

Those giant teeth just might make a comeback.


AP:: I doubt it. I have no doubt that tusks belong to walruses, and of what use do walruses have of their tusks?? It is certain that walruses have tusks. But has any saber tooth tiger fossil ever been found with the sabers attached?????

From all my research, not a single fossil tiger jaw has ever been found with the sabers attached. Not a one.


As famous as Smilodon is, it was only the last and largest of the great sabertooths.

Ridiculously long canines had already been a trend for millions of years by the time Smilodon was prowling around, and scientists have only just begun to understand how sabertoothed carnivores used their dental weapons.


AP:: And this is the crux of my doubt, a suspicion that began when I was in High School, and long after I learned and understood evolution. Huge teeth on a tiger impedes the tiger throughout its life, giving no benefit but a hindrance. And Darwin evolution does not work that way. For something to evolve has to make the sabers on a tiger more successful. Instead, huge teeth hinder the tiger throughout its life. And so, I challenge the paleontology community to show us a single fossil tiger jaw with saber teeth intact. I do not mean those museums that glued, screwed and wired saber teeth to a jaw.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet. If you, the reader, is wondering why AP posts this to a thread which is off topic in sci.math or sci.physics, is because some stalkers track AP, such as kibo, dan, jan who have been paid to stalk for 3 decades and when they see AP trying to post to his own thread that is on-topic they throw a impossible reCAPTcha suppression and repression at me that only wastes my time. From what AP can make out-- Google is not the only one using reCAPTcha, apparently the US govt rents out reCAPTcha. So if you see a AP post in a thread off topic, is because kooks of reCAPTcha are making it impossible for AP to post to the on-topic thread.

Read all of AP's post in peace and quiet in his newsgroup-- what sci.physics and sci.math should look like when govt spammers are not allowed in a newsgroup to wreck the newsgroup. Govt spammers have their agenda of drag net spam, and then their agenda of spy message codes, such as the "i sick, i cry" baloney, which only ends up ruining the newsgroups and why Google decided to close shop having fought govt bureaucrat mind sets for 30 years, and time to close shop.

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.

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