Re: Arindam Banerjee asks Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the sam

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 14:16:05 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee asks Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S.,Narendra Modi if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' in
> 3m views

No I do not, Archie. Stop lying. I have nothing to do with bogus physics.
My physics relates to:
Latest experiments (2022) showing my invention of a new kind of rail gun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0

Which is improved upon in, and its potential for ejecting matter into near space , and horizontal tunneling shown in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6pjy0Wvujs&t=19s

and the following shows how a new class of linear motor violating inertia can be developed by arresting the momentum of the armature and imparting that to the whole system, giving it an increased velocity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsIuzEajTc&t=2s

Earlier experiments (2017)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqBfwAClVlg
IFE - 1 Ground Experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9eGq4Oiv9s
IFE - 2 Experimental setups

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3hC48BMrno
IFE - 3 Pendulum experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sSPxGsLkws
IFE - 4 Evolution of spaceship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdM6UDPauU
IFE - 5 Hydrogen Transmission Network

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUAcx7rAplc
IFE - 6 Spaceship Design

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Zbpvc3fdA
IFE - 7 Anti-Gravity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9LUwqMhxY
IFE - 8 New Physics

The way the universe operates:
(2020)
The cause of gravity
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/mmigkl3yZYc/m/8Rs16NCXAAAJ

Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 1
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/6UIGDNHH7n0/m/U0t-kYqgAAAJ

Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 2
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/CffbGTXV72c/m/5ONP6J6gAAAJ

(2006)
Introduction to "A New Look Towards the Principles of Motion"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/1wmee5C8mFs/kJMPdnFkAwAJ

Section 1
Linear Motion, Momentum, Force, Energy, Internal Force Engines, and the design of Interstellar Spacecraft
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/GbpQC3a2d1Q/jSXQeb9kAwAJ

Section 1 (contd.)
Linear Motion, Momentum, Force, Energy, Internal Force Engines, and the design of Interstellar Spacecraft
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/P9ZiinIDhHU/ZtMQVyliBQAJ

Section 2
The Creation and Destruction of Energy
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/wY6_9V8ucSY/3nnJQk9iBQAJ

Section 3
The Structure of Heavenly Bodies
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/8jH-SQIFFDo/O1jn3HpiBQAJ

Section 4
The Nature of Explosion
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/7TkOVZigFHg/uv43_aZiBQAJ

Section 5
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/jhgcsTq-NrQ/ZBwG8S9jBQAJ

[Archimedes Plutonium]

On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 3:17:56 AM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 14:16:05 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > Arindam Banerjee asks Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S.,Narendra Modi if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' in
> > 3m views
> No I do not, Archie. Stop lying. I have nothing to do with bogus physics.
> My physics relates to:

Feynman is not a bogus physicist, but, you my friend, is a bogus physicist. Maybe you do not understand any of the mathematics above. But any one at Indian Institute of Technology would almost immediately recognize that mathematics. Why not go and help save the Indian wildlife, especially the new cheetahs reintroduced to India by PM Modi. So grateful that PM Modi has brought cheetahs back to India. I hope they make a long long film of the new cheetahs in India.

AB, your time spent on sci.physics is mostly all a waste of time, but you will never recognize nor understand that--- And that is why I make use of you foolery here in sci.physics.

AP

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 18:30:23 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 3:17:56 AM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> > On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 14:16:05 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > > Arindam Banerjee asks Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S.,Narendra Modi if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' in
> > > 3m views
> > No I do not, Archie. Stop lying. I have nothing to do with bogus physics.
> > My physics relates to:
> Feynman is not a bogus physicist, but, you my friend, is a bogus physicist.

When not talking about entropy, relativity or quantum, Feynman does make sense, but as he does talk of entropy, relativity and quantum-bunkum he is the second greatest pseudophysicist after Einstein.
You stick to washing your arse, Archie, and get Greta to rally her troops for that noble pro-environment purpose - saving trees.

> Maybe you do not understand any of the mathematics above.

Lesson below for you, Archie, and the bright-eyed bushy-tailed ones.

Maths is for maths, nothing else, when pure. When talking about physics, what is being talked about - to everyone's ken - may be needed to be expressed in mathematical form for various purposes - conciseness, optimisations for engineering, derivation of higher level functions, making diagrams and charts, control systems, insights into possible physical states, etc. What is most necessary is non-bullshitting with mathematical garbage. One must always, always, explain all the steps involved and in the physics sense, their relation with reality.

This is exactly what all physicists prior to Einstein did, and what I do.

When merely writing down math symbols, with no explanation, one ensures that all those who are scientific are assured that fraud is getting committed. As no Einsteinian does the scientific method, they are all frauds. They make wrong assumptions/postulates such as the invariance of the speed of light, and then use math garbage to get ridiculous equations like e=mcc, and all sorts of nonsense notions.

> But any one at Indian Institute of Technology would almost immediately recognize that mathematics.

No they would not. It is garbage, pure and simple. In the IITs in my time at least such garbage was never introduced to any student at any level. Only Quantum Mechanics, which we had to pass to get our degree, but we students all agreed it made no sense, was totally off the standard scientific procedure, but we did agree that it was done by brilliant minds who could think of such extraordinary stuff. That it was all bullshit, we did not are to think. Only after many years of actual work with antennas, making them radiate, and deriving e=0,5mVVN(N-k), making rail guns showing no reaction, can I dismiss all the entropy, relativity and quantum stuff as dystrophy, depravity and bunkum, respectively.

> Why not go and help save the Indian wildlife, especially the new cheetahs reintroduced to India by PM Modi. So grateful that PM Modi has brought cheetahs back to India. I hope they make a long long film of the new cheetahs in India.

So long as the cheetahs, get enough food to thrive in freedom, good. Now you go preach arsewashing to the arsewipers, rallying the Gretas for that purpose.

> AB, your time spent on sci.physics is mostly all a waste of time, but you will never recognize nor understand that--- And that is why I make use of you foolery here in sci.physics.

Worry not, Archie. This is the best place to make my new physics available to one and all, for all time. That I get death threats, abuse, ridicule, etc. from the entrenched fraudulent fatcats improves the chances for rapid revolutionary changes in physics education and technology implementation.
>
> AP

Thanks for your publicity, Archie and with
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

[Volney]

On 4/2/2023 4:52 AM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 18:30:23 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 3:17:56 AM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 14:16:05 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>>> Arindam Banerjee asks Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S.,Narendra Modi if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' in
>>>> 3m views
>>> No I do not, Archie. Stop lying. I have nothing to do with bogus physics.
>>> My physics relates to:
>> Feynman is not a bogus physicist, but, you my friend, is a bogus physicist.
>
> When not talking about entropy, relativity or quantum, Feynman does make sense, but as he does talk of entropy, relativity and quantum-bunkum he is the second greatest pseudophysicist after Einstein.
> You stick to washing your arse, Archie, and get Greta to rally her troops for that noble pro-environment purpose - saving trees.

[...]

The brotherly kꙭkfight of the century rages on! A battle of wits
between two unarmed men!

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Beijing▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ mushroom cloud, Xi as Putin's stooge when Russia vaporizes Beijing with its RS-28 Sarmat "Satan II", all because Xi was too dumb to realize you can never trust an insane person

Pentcho Valev spamming as China under Russian Sarmats. Does it remind Pentcho of Nero fiddling while Rome burnt???
Pete Olcott where is your spam halting machine when China needs it the most??????

Pentcho Valev picture profile
Pentcho Valev
31
Apr 1
Einstein's Sins

Thing about Kibo Parry M-V is he does not understand he is more insane than is Arindam Banerjee. I do not know, -- perhaps Kibo was kicked out of Rensselaer Polytech for the exact same reason-- nonstop stalking of others which is far worse insanity than Arindam Banerjee seeking recognition.
On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 11:04:54 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> The brotherly kookfight of the century rages on! A battle of wits
> between two unarmed men!

On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 11:56:20 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics "Putin's stooge"
>"wasn't bolted down too tight in the first place"



Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Chongqing, Tianjin, Chengdu, Hangzhou, Nanjing, Wuhan, Xi'An, Suzhou, Harbin, Shenyang, Qingdao, Zhengzhou, Dongguan, Foshan, Dalian, Jinan, Changchun, Hefei

Shenzhen▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ Xi as Putin's stooge when Russia vaporizes Shenzhen with its RS-28 Sarmat "Satan II", all because Xi was too dumb to realize you can never trust an insane person



Is Pete Olcott in his Halting Problem, halting the vaporization of Wuhan by Putin's Russia???


On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 11:56:20 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
> Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics "Putin's stooge"
>"wasn't bolted down too tight in the first place"

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 1:16:55 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> "Imp of Science"
>"not one single marble of commonsense in my entire brain"

Moscow█۞█ blackout, knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity



Ukraine cannot win a war if it has nada, no, zero offense, it needs to knock out Russian electric lines. And the Baltic states can help.
Knock out electricity in
Novosibirsk
Yekaterinburg
Novgorod
Samara
Omsk
Kazan
Rostov-na-Donu
Chelyabinsk
Ufa
Perm


_Every Russian missile fired into Ukraine met with a drone from Ukraine knocking out Moscow electric power lines

_Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity

NO ONE CAN WIN A FIGHT UNLESS THEY HAVE AN OFFENSE!!!!!!

NO ONE CAN WIN A FIGHT UNLESS THEY HAVE AN OFFENSE!!!!!!

NO ONE CAN WIN A FIGHT UNLESS THEY HAVE AN OFFENSE!!!!!!

_No one can win a fight or war without any offense, West, Biden give Ukraine drones that knock out electricity inside Russia

_End the Ukraine war by March 2023 as the Russian people depose the dictator

_rolling electric blackouts and give Iran to Iraq-- a blooming democracy, not a stupid dictator

_And as the Baby Xi grew up from the rice paddies and reeds of Outer Manchuria, stolen by the Naxi and Zani Dictator Putin in Moscow, Xi learned in school in chemical engineering that Taiwan was 1/28 the size of Outer Manchuria, as Putin bombs Ukraine. And the nascent Xi orders 1,000 divisions to the Outer Manchuria border to regain back the stolen Old China.

_Xi has 1,000 divisions on Vladivostok border ready to swoop in and reclaim the stolen land of Outer Manchuria. See reconnaissance photo above of 1,000 divisions.

NATO and the West has just two good options here, for Putin should have been removed in 2006 with Litvinenko poisoning. Now the insane Putin can poison the entire world with a nuclear war. Putin needed to go in 2006, for insanity just gets worse and worse.

Either
(1) give Ukraine drones to knock out electric power in Moscow and beyond
Or
(2) give Ukraine NATO membership and tell Russia to clear out in a week or NATO forces go in and clear them out.

Of course, every day Putin and Russia needs reminding that if he presses nuclear buttons or nuclear bomb on Ukraine that Russia will be a nuclear ash pile before the day is out.

What should have been done in 2006, unfortunately that delay to 2022. Same can be said of Hitler-- he should have been removed in the early 1930s before his insanity got going.

& wrote:
> _And as the Baby Xi grew up from the rice paddies and reeds of Outer
> Manchuria, stolen by the Naxi and Zani Dictator Putin in Moscow, Xi
> learned in school in chemical engineering that Taiwan was 1/28 the size
> of Outer Manchuria, Emperor Qing's homeland, now occupied by homeless Russians drinking vodka, as Putin bombs Ukraine. And the nascent Xi orders
> 1,000 divisions to the Outer Manchuria border to regain back the stolen


> > Why Putin is 2X smarter than Xi as dictators// SCIENCE COUNCIL RULES EARTH, not petty dictators
> > 2m views
> >
> >
> 2> If Putin pushes nuclear buttons, he drags down China along with Russia into a nuclear ash waste pile, and this means Xi is a inferior junior partner to Putin. Putin will drag down Xi's China, never the reverse.
> >
> 2> So, one can look at the present situation on Earth and ask several logical questions about the 2 dictators of Putin's Russia and China's Xi.
> >
> > It is little wonder that both Russia and China dictators are combative towards the West. Because dictators never want to give up on power but stay in power all their life long. So they oppose the West because the West has grown up to democracy-- let the people have power, not one single idiot having power all his life time.
> >
> > Naturally, Putin will want to keep the Russian people suppressed and have Russia be a second rate government as a dictator. Same goes for China-- they never want to give up power so the people themselves choose their leader.
> >
> > But can we find differences in Putin and Xi themselves? Well in the West we call the Chinese inscrutable-- meaning -- little logical commonsense. And is this a valid description?? Yes of course, considering that Russia had stolen the lands of Outer Manchuria, some 28 times larger of a land mass than is Taiwan island. Yet there is Xi, spending so much time on wanting to invade Taiwan, when it is Outer Manchuria and Vladivostok (Haishenwai) that he should be focusing attention upon. And while Putin is distracted with Ukraine, is the time for Xi to recapture Outer Manchuria, the Qing dynasty empire, Qing's Manchurian homeland.
> >
> > What does Xi do instead??? He focuses on Taiwan and befriends Russia. Why, at this rate, if Russia takes Inner Manchuria, we can expect Xi and the Chinese Communist Party to become even more loving of Russia for stealing more land of China.
> >
> > And there is Xi, whose China has become rich with trading with the West, yet every day, Xi foaming at the mouth in hatred of the West.
> >
> > So yes, Putin is 2X smarter as a dictator than is Xi, as if Putin has Xi in his side pocket.
> >
> > Is there some scientific explanation as to why Xi is 2X dumber than Putin?? Perhaps, in that China is densely populated and the air pollution over all of China is worse than most countries. That Xi probably has 1/2 of his brain filled with CO and CO2 isomers and lead, and mercury and nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide from just living in that air polluted hellhole of Beijing. Xi studied chemistry and should know this. Whereas Putin likely detox..s every evening with breathing in pure oxygen at his residence and takes oxygen breathing tanks to office and work. This easily can explain the light-headed reasoning that Xi and his foreign diplomats Wang Yi display, where Putin plays them like a chess game, --- checkmate in 7 moves.
> >
> > This explains why Xi hates the West for not stealing any Chinese lands and making China rich in trade, while loving Putin for stealing Outer Manchuria, and proposing having Russia push nuclear buttons, making both Russia and China a nuclear waste site after ICBMs wipe China off the map.
> >
> > Xi's brain is full of air pollution toxins from the nasty Chinese air. They still build a new coal fired plant in China every day. The air in China is the worst air in the entire world.
> >
> > Why Putin is 2X smarter than Xi as dictators// SCIENCE COUNCIL RULES EARTH, not petty dictators.

> > > 2/1, AP tards:
> > > > Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/2, AP tards:
> > > > Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/3, AP tards:
> > > > Every Russian missile fired into Ukraine met with a drone from Ukraine knocking out Moscow electric power lines
> > > >
> > > > Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/4, AP tards:
> > > > drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/9 (vacation?), AP tards:
> > > > drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/9, AP tards (again):
> > > > drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/10, AP tards:
> > > > drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/11, AP tards:
> > > > drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/12, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/12, AP tards again:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/13, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/14, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/15, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/16, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/17, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/18, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/19, AP tards:
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/20, AP tards:
> > >
> > > > Electricity out Novosibirsk &Volgograd█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/22, AP tards:
> > > > Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/23, AP tards:
> > > > Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/24, AP tards:
> > > > Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/25, AP tards:
> > > > Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
> > >
> > > 2/26, AP tards:
> > > > Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
> > > > _drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity

[Volney]

Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics Archimedes "Putin's stooge"
Plutonium tarded:

> Beijing▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ mushroom cloud, Xi as Putin's stooge when Russia vaporizes Beijing with its RS-28 Sarmat "Satan II", all because Xi was too dumb to realize you can never trust an insane person

A warning to Xi: Don't trust InsanePlutonium with anything, not even
with the time of day!

> Thing about Kibo Parry M-V is he does not understand he is more insane than is Arindam Banerjee.

Who is really more insane, InsanePlutonium or his brother in
crackpottery , Banerjee. It remains amusing how these two recognize each
other as crackpots, but neither can see himself as a crackpot.

> I do not know,

There is very much that you don't know.

> -- perhaps Kibo was kicked out of Rensselaer Polytech for the exact same reason

Are you *still* struggling to find out where I attended college? Didn't
I tell you that I did not attend RPI, nor any of your other guesses? Of
course I won't tell you, since you'll start stalking their math and
physics professors for some reason. Even though by now, I'm sure none of
their current professors will have had me as a student or know me.

>-- nonstop stalking of others which is far worse insanity than Arindam Banerjee seeking recognition.

What about InsanePlutonium's nonstop stalking of math and physics
professors, in his failing insane quest seeking recognition?

> On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 11:04:54 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
>> The brotherly kookfight of the century rages on! A battle of wits
>> between two unarmed men!

To put it kindly...

> On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 11:56:20 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:

>> Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics Archimedes "Putin's stooge" Plutonium tarded:
>> Archimedes "wasn't bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium

>
> On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 11:56:20 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:

>> Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics Archimedes "Putin's stooge" Plutonium
>> Archimedes "wasn't bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium

>
> On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 1:16:55 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:

>> Archimedes "Imp of Science" Plutonium
>> Archimedes "not one single marble of commonsense in my entire brain" Plutonium

StupidPlutonium, how about these emojis? These two lines mean the same,
without and with emojis.

Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics Archimedes "Putin's stooge"
Plutonium tarded:

🤖🪰 of Math and 🌬️🪰 of Physics Archimedes "Putin's stooge" Plutonium
tarded:

Is <robot><fly> too arcane to mean "botfly"? Is <wind blowing><fly> OK
for "blowfly"? Of course I want to include "screwfly" but there is no
"screw" emoji. There's a nut-and-bolt and there's a screwdriver, but no
screw emoji. Which would you prefer for "screwfly", <nut-and-bolt><fly>
or <screwdriver><fly>? 🔩🪰 or 🪛🪰 ?

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Tuesday, 4 April 2023 at 15:15:04 UTC+10, Volney wrote:
> Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics Archimedes "Putin's stooge"
> Plutonium tarded:

> > Beijing▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ mushroom cloud, Xi as Putin's stooge when Russia vaporizes Beijing with its RS-28 Sarmat "Satan II", all because Xi was too dumb to realize you can never trust an insane person
> A warning to Xi: Don't trust InsanePlutonium with anything, not even
> with the time of day!
> > Thing about Kibo Parry M-V is he does not understand he is more insane than is Arindam Banerjee.
> Who is really more insane, InsanePlutonium or his brother in
> crackpottery , Banerjee. It remains amusing how these two recognize each
> other as crackpots, but neither can see himself as a crackpot.

It is cleverer to demean me with comparison to the imbecile Archie, than it is to issue death threats and lie stupidly.
The moron Moroney is smarter, thus, than Roachie and whodumbo.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

I guess India surpassed China in population, judging from the "crazies" that infest and inflict sci.physics.

Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".

RAIL GUN that knocks out Moscow & St.Petersburg electricity, and here I thought it was going to be drones.

A.Banerjee on Indian Institute of Tech. --"the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth"

AP writes: Bad experience? Bad grades Arindam, take up engineering and cheer up!!!

> On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 7:08:51 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> > Very sad to say, my new design rail gun has even less acceptibility to the powers that be than your plutonium universe, Archie.
>
> Is Arindam Banerjee fixing his rail gun to knock out St.Petersburg electric lines????
>
> How does that rail gun work Arindam, you attach your Rail Gun to a electric line in a network and it destroys the entire network, even the source of power, by blowing up all the transformers in the network.
> RAIL GUN that knocks out Moscow & St.Petersburg electricity, and here I thought it was going to be drones.
> Bravo, Arindam finally makes good in physics, give Arindam the best Darjeeling tea to be found!!!! You take it with cream Arindam???

No way, Archie.
You sound like Gulliver before the King of Brobdingnag, proposing all sorts of horrid weaponry for victory in war.
The response from His Majesty was, as per Internet:
****
Based on Gulliver's descriptions of their behaviour, the King describes the English as "the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth".
****
You Americans are, of course, even more debased than the English of Swift's time.
The English since Swift have been improved with contact from the Brahmanical upper castes of India, but that has not happened to the other whites who could not get such contact.
Which is why, as debased English, you think I should be interested in doing evil stuff you lots are so good at.
Grow up, Archie. Don't be one among the most pernicious race of odious little vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee




> Sanjay Kumar,Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., ,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
> >
> > 2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
> >
> >
> > > > Making money by teaching and spreading lies about Nature. The fraud comes from ignoring my discoveries about Nature, thus depriving all.
> > > Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
> > >
> > > Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)
> > >
> > > Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
> > >
> > > Subhas Sarkar
> > > Annapurna Devi Yadav
> > > Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
> > > Sanjay Kumar
>
> Saxena Vikrant,,Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
> >
> > Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)
> >
> > Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
> >
> > Subhas Sarkar
> > Annapurna Devi Yadav
> > Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
> > Sanjay Kumar
> > > Constant daily spamming b.s. nonsense from Arindam Banerjee of his hatred of physics and physicists.
>
>
>
>
> Indian Institute of Technology
>
> Physics dept. Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata, Bhatnagar M.C. , Chatterjee R., Chaudhary Sujeet, Das Pintu, Dhaka Rajendra S., Ghosh Joyee, Ghosh Pradipta, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Kedar B Khare, Khare Neeraj, Kumar Sunil, Malik H.K., Mani Brajesh Kumar, Marathe Rahul, Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S. , Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., Ravishankar V. , Reddy G.B. , Saxena Vikrant, Sengupta Amartya, Senthilkumaran P. ,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K., Singh J.P., Singh Rajendra, Sinha Aloka, Soni Ravi Kant, Srivastava Pankaj, Varshney R.K., Vijaya Prakash G.
>
>
>
>
> > >
> Sinha Aloka, Soni Ravi Kant,Annapurna Devi Yadav,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K.,Kanseri Bhaskar, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata. Hi professors of Indian Institute of Technology. Can any of you please remember when Arindam Banerjee was a student of IIT (as he claims he was)?? And can you remember if he had his head up his arse in antiscience as he spams each and every day of the year in sci.physics, now????
>
> Sanjay Kumar,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
>
> 2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
> 
> 
> > > Why does IIT put up with the Arsewipe of Physics-- Arindam Banerjee
> > >
> > > Arindam Banerjee profile photo
> > > Arindam Banerjee
> > >
> > > Paul Alsing
> > >
> > > unread,
> > > Lifelong bullshitting
> > > On Sunday, March 5, 2023 at 12:49:42 AM UTC-8, Arindam Banerjee wrote: > Lifelong bullshitting is
> > > 8:54 PM
> > > 
> > > Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
> > > Arindam Banerjee
> > > unread,
> > > All Nobel laureates in physics are mendacious nincompoops
> > > As the believe in the law of conservation of energy. Energy gets created and destroyed in our
> > > 8:08 PM
> > > 
> > > > Could the professors of IIT realize-- oh o, we have a fruitcake on our hands??? And was it the case that IIT just kept passing Arindam Banerjee up to higher grades just to get rid of the pest, when they should have failed him????

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Monday, 10 April 2023 at 14:08:17 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> I guess India surpassed China in population

1.41 billion, and 1.4 billion of them love me or would love me to distraction if they knew me personally.
The 0.01 billion who do not and would not are the western-suckups, the grovelling reverse-racists, the careerist or political treacherous types, Archie, and these disgraceful sorts are those who matter in the land. Ugh.
One of them was called Garg, a minor scientist of the GoI, who without contacting me in any way disparaged my revolutionary new approach in physics in 2003.

- snip -

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Arindam Banerjee nutjob of sci.physics, especially his Apollo 11 was a stage act in Arizona desert.

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

55
unread,
Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore--are you as dumb as Arindam Banerjee never realizing the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV,monopole=.5MeV // 12 proofs below
3:40 AM

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

37
unread,
Re: Bhattacharya Saswata,Indian Institute of Technology,Bhatnagar M.C. ,Chatterjee R.,Chaudhary Sujeet,Das Pintu-- is the reason none of you have confirmed real proton = 840MeV, real electron is the muon and .5MeV was Dirac monopole--busy on
3:37 AM

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

23
unread,
Re: Do they teach how not to steal from others in India, for I know South Africa has that problem as seen in John Gabriel, but then Arindam Banerjee is another stealer who never quotes, never cites reference source, never footnotes. For Benjamin
May 12

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

,

3
unread,
Re: Melbourne Uni Lloyd L Hollenberg Geoffrey N Taylor Raymond R Volkas can you please vouch for the fact that Australia never had rail gun research and that the spammer Arindam Banerjee is just one liaring b.s. cluttering up sci.physics
May 12

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

21
unread,
Re: Harvard's Dr. Hau and Berkeley's Sylvia Else do not do physics but just play ad hominem games
May 23

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

,

5
unread,
Re: Melbourne_Uni Rachel L Webster,James Burton Wyithe,Elisabetta Barberio can you please vouch for the fact that Australia never had rail gun research and that the spammer Arindam Banerjee is just one liaring b.s. cluttering up sci.physics

, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam

May 7

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

,

8
unread,
Re: Arindam Banerjee, the anal fuckdog of science, physics, when he never learned what 1st year students learn-- Units, units units-- E=mc^2 multiplied by a scalar makes no changes-- no changes to Old Ohm's law or New Ohm's law when multiplied by sca
May 7
mitchr...@gmail.com's profile photo
mitchr...@gmail.com
, …
Arindam Banerjee
22
unread,
Re: Anurag Sharma,Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha,Bhattacharya Saswata of Indian Institute of Tech, are you as stupid and pandering fools of Climate Change like Jai Maharaj// thus never able to see real proton = 840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole?
May 1

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

53
unread,
Re: Hi, I am Arindam Banerjee a arsewipe of physics,so stupid in physics I am too dumb to ask the question which is the Atom's true electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle and thus I attempt to keep Indian Institute of Technology as dumb as Arindam Banerj
Apr 28

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

,

8
unread,
Re: Arindam Banerjee asks Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S.,Narendra Modi if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C'
Apr 25

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

,

2
unread,
Re: Paid for anti-science spammers of disinformation like Banerjee & Valev banned from sci.math, sci.physics simply from Economic Sanctions on Russia, Iran, NK, et al
Apr 21

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

,

3
unread,
Re: Arindam Banerjee claims do not square up Uni Melbourne--Harry M Quiney Jeffrey C McCallum Lloyd L Hollenberg, can Australia verify
Apr 10

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

32
unread,
Re: Hi, I'm Arindam Banerjee and throw a flaming fresh shit turd into the middle of Physics-- why?
Apr 15

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

49
unread,
Re: Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Kedar B Khare of Indian Institute of Tech, are you as insane nutjob of physics as Arindam Banerjee // not able to see real proton = 840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole and real electron is
Apr 9

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

50
unread,
Bhatnagar M.C. ,Indian Institute of Technology,Chatterjee R.,Chaudhary Sujeet,Das Pintu,Dhaka Rajendra S.-- is the reason none of you have confirmed real proton = 840MeV, real electron is the muon and .5MeV was Dirac monopole-- too busy on Arindam??
Apr 9

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

66
unread,
Re: Banerjee Varsha,Indian Institute of Technology,Bhattacharya Saswata,Bhatnagar M.C. ,Chatterjee R.-- is the reason none of you have confirmed real proton = 840MeV, real electron is the muon and .5MeV was Dirac monopole--busy with imp Arindam??
Apr 9

Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee

, …

9
unread,
Re: Arindam Banerjee asks Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the sam

[Arindam Banerjee]

Thanks for the publicity, Archie.

On Thursday, 25 May 2023 at 11:11:56 UTC+10, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee nutjob of sci.physics, especially his Apollo 11 was a stage act in Arizona desert.

It was not convincing, Archie.
Looks like they want to go to the moon again.
They better do so with my Internal Force Engines.
Not that I expect those criminal frauds to acknowledge my discoveries and inventions, yet it will be amusing for me to see how they continue to ignore me.
They better see the elephant in the room, and give me the due credit, above da Vinci.

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Arindam Banerjee why are you and Indian Institute of Tech too stupid to understand real electron of Atoms is the muon inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law while the 0.5MeV particle is Dirac's Magnetic Monopole?? Why such physics idiocy??

Arindam, do you want to be a physics failure all your life???


Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee
, …

Enes Richard
50
unread,
The law of conservation of energy
sobota, 27 maja 2023 o 23:38:22 UTC+2 Paul Alsing napisał(a): > On Saturday, May 27, 2023 at 2:10:
5:16 PM


Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee
, …

Enes Richard
19
unread,
About the MMI bungle, leading to the horrendous disaster that is absurd physics
4:55 PM


My 137th published book

Introduction to AP's TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Physics textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)



#1 New Release in Electromagnetic Theory

This will be AP's 137th published book on science. And the number 137 is special to me for it is the number of QED, Quantum Electrodynamics as the inverse fine structure constant. I can always remember 137 as that special constant of physics and so I can remember where Teaching True Physics was started by me.

Time has come for the world to have the authoritative textbooks for all of High School and College education. Written by the leading physics expert of the time. The last such was Feynman in the 1960s with Feynman Lectures on Physics. The time before was Maxwell in 1860s with his books and Encyclopedia Britannica editorship. The time is ripe in 2020 for the new authoritative texts on physics. It will be started in 2020 which is 60 years after Feynman. In the future, I request the physics community updates the premier physics textbook series at least every 30 years. For we can see that pattern of 30 years approximately from Faraday in 1830 to Maxwell in 1860 to Planck and Rutherford in about 1900, to Dirac in 1930 to Feynman in 1960 and finally to AP in 1990 and 2020. So much happens in physics after 30 years, that we need the revisions to take place in a timely manner. But also, as we move to Internet publishing such as Amazon's Kindle, we can see that updates can take place very fast, as editing can be a ongoing monthly or yearly activity. I for one keep constantly updating all my published books, at least I try to.

Feynman was the best to make the last authoritative textbook series for his concentration was QED, Quantum Electrodynamics, the pinnacle peak of physics during the 20th century. Of course the Atom Totality theory took over after 1990 and all of physics; for all sciences are under the Atom Totality theory.
And as QED was the pinnacle peak before 1990, the new pinnacle peak is the Atom Totality theory. The Atom Totality theory is the advancement of QED, for the Atom Totality theory primal axiom says -- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
Length: 64 pages

Product details
• File Size : 790 KB
• Publication Date : October 5, 2020
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print Length : 64 pages
• Text-to-Speech : Not enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced Typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Language: : English
• ASIN : B08KS4YGWY
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #430,602 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #39 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #73 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
◦ #74 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads


#2-2, 145th published book


TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS//Junior High School// Physics textbook series, book 2
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

What I am doing is clearing the field of physics, clearing it of all the silly mistakes and errors and beliefs that clutter up physics. Clearing it of its fraud and fakeries and con-artistry. I thought of doing these textbooks starting with Senior year High School, wherein I myself started learning physics. But because of so much fraud and fakery in physics education, I believe we have to drop down to Junior year High School to make a drastic and dramatic emphasis on fakery and con-artistry that so much pervades science and physics in particular. So that we have two years in High School to learn physics. And discard the nonsense of physics brainwash that Old Physics filled the halls and corridors of education.

Product details
• ASIN : B08PC99JJB
• Publication date : November 29, 2020
• Language: : English
• File size : 682 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 78 pages
• Lending : Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #185,995 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #42 in Two-Hour Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #344 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,160 in Physics (Books)




#2-3, 146th published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// Senior High School// Physics textbook series, book 3
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

I believe that in knowing the history of a science is knowing half of that science. And that if you are amiss of knowing the history behind a science, you have only a partial understanding of the concepts and ideas behind the science. I further believe it is easier to teach a science by teaching its history than any other means of teaching. So for senior year High School, I believe physics history is the best way of teaching physics. And in later years of physics courses, we can always pick up on details. So I devote this senior year High School physics to a history of physics, but only true physics. And there are few books written on the history of physics, so I chose Asimov's The History of Physics, 1966 as the template book for this textbook. Now Asimov's book is full of error and mistakes, and that is disappointing but all of Old Physics is full of error. On errors and mistakes of Old Physics, the best I can do is warn the students, and the largest warning of all is that whenever someone in Old Physics says "electron" what they are talking about is really the Dirac magnetic monopole. And whenever they talk about the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom, they are talking about huge huge grave mistakes, for the true atom is protons as 8 ringed toruses with a muon stuck inside of a proton doing the Faraday law and producing those magnetic monopoles as electricity. I use Asimov's book as a template but in the future, I hope to rewrite this textbook using no template at all, that is if I have time in the future.
Cover Picture: Is the book The History of Physics, by Isaac Asimov, 1966 and on top of the book are 4 cut-outs of bent circles representing magnetic monopoles which revolutionizes modern physics, especially the ElectroMagnetic theory.

Product details
◦ ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08RK33T8V
◦ Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 28, 2020
◦ Language ‏ : ‎ English
◦ File size ‏ : ‎ 794 KB
◦ Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
◦ Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
◦ Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
◦ X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
◦ Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
◦ Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
◦ Print length ‏ : ‎ 124 pages
◦ Best Sellers Rank: #293,315 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #401 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,236 in Physics (Books)


#2-4, 151st published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also, physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts, throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in 1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard, not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.

Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.

Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09JW5DVYM
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ October 19, 2021
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1048 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 404 pages
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,844,838 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #487 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #1,210 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
◦ #8,751 in Electromagnetism (Books)


#2-5, 174th published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, 2nd year College
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle Edition

Preface: At the moment this is a physics book for 2nd year College. But as the months and years go by I intend to convert it into a textbook of about 200 to 300 pages. It is mostly about thermodynamics for in my own college education 1968-1972 at University of Cincinnati, I took physics thermodynamics in the 2nd year (if memory has not failed me).
Cover-Picture: Is a iphone photograph of the Chemistry textbook I used at UC 1968-1972 with my own paper cut-outs of magnetic monopoles. Pictured are 4 bent circles, bent at 90degrees from diameter and each bent circle is a individual magnetic monopole.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09TKL4HMC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 27, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 675 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 41 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled



#2-6, 177th published book
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Architecture of Atoms, 3rd year College
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Kindle Edition

Preface: I come to teaching physics for 3rd year College as the Architecture of Atoms. My writing style will be prose-narrative, until I add on exercise problems and convert it into a textbook. The 1st year College, has to be the equations and laws of electricity and magnetism. For the primal-axiom over all of physics is-- All is Atom, and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. The 2nd year College is thermodynamics. And now the 3rd year College physics has to teach the Architecture, the geometry of the inside and exterior surface of the atom. One of the greatest faults, misery, and anti-science teaching of Old Physics is their denial that subatomic particles have to be something more than tiny balls tiny spheres that do-nothing, perform nothing, function as nothing. That the proton and neutron and true electron=muon, has to be matter with a function and purpose and design and task and job. This is a year of physics teaching of the architecture of the atom.
Cover Picture: A iphone photograph of my book chemistry book, a long time favorite of mine of CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, Waser, Trueblood, Knobler, 1980, and page 307 of that book. Why this page? Because it was instrumental in my discovery of the true Architecture of Atoms. Not many professors of chemistry or physics dive into the Shrodinger Equation that results in a meaningful teaching of "matter waves". Matter waves are the heart of understanding the geometry of Atomic Architecture.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09VFH9QST
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 12, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 823 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 74 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled



#2-7, 178th published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Architecture of Light Waves & Energy, 4th year College
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Kindle edition)


Preface: This is 4th year College Physics and the important ideas of physics to learn as last year undergraduate school is the architecture and geometry of the Light Wave & Energy in physics. This is New Physics and not Old Physics. New Physics is defined as physics that knows and uses the true electron of atoms is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus and doing the Faraday law, creating new electrical energy that is storaged in the neutrons of atoms until they grow from 1eV into 945MeV and then create a new higher atomic numbered atom or emitted as radioactivity. Old Physics mistakenly identified the electron of atoms as the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. In 3rd year College we studied the architecture of the interior of atoms. In 4th year College we study the architecture of Light Waves & Energy.

The template book for 4th year College is Feynman's 1985 book of QED.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of the template book for this book. Feynman's 1985 QED, quantum electrodynamics, showing my plastic toy model of DNA and my cut-outs of 4 bent circles that each bent circle represents one magnetic monopole. I arranged the monopoles into a single strand of a cycloid wave.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09W58XGDW
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 21, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 824 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 66 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled


#2-8, 202nd published book

TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS, Permanent Colony on Europa// graduate school college
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle edition)

Preface: Crisis emergency times call for textbooks to reflect the times. The Sun gone Red Giant Initiation Phase as measured by NASA in the decade of 2010 to 2020 as showing a 0.005% Solar Radiation yearly increase threatens all life on Earth with extinction and oblivion. This crisis calls for "All Hands On Deck" to solve the problem. And to solve that problem we need all scientists in the work effort of getting Europa, the satellite of Jupiter to be our second home. I see no textbook for college graduate school as appropriate, unless it is a book addressing the crisis itself. Just the opposite of Nero was fiddling while Rome burned; we want All Hands on Deck, to save as much life on Earth as possible.


Cover Picture: Is my iphone photo of a Google search for Europa with Webb telescope. These are exciting times in that the Webb telescope maybe able to pinpoint life on Europa.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BC5T9JBH
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 27, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 801 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 45 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled




#2-9, 161st published book

PHYSICSOPEDIA -- List of 137 fakes and mistakes of Old Physics// Student teaches professor Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 24Apr2022. This is AP's 161st published book of science.

Preface:
A Physicsopedia is a book of the overall assessment and evaluation of the state of the art of Physics. It is like a report card. It is a total view of the science and a judgement of the science, both of the past, present and the direction forward into the future. Its greatest use is to alert readers and people in science of what is wrong with their subject, and as a ancillary use, to alert students what to avoid in college as a waste of time.

It is not in alphabetical order but mostly, rather, has a ordering of what is most important at the start and only at the very very end. For there is no index.

Physics is the most important hard science for every other science is a specialized part of physics. And Old Physics has three key huge mistakes that this book addresses. The true theory of the Universe is the Atom Totality, not the Big Bang which is a ridiculous theory. The true electron of atoms is not the particle of 0.5MeV which turns out to be Dirac's magnetic monopole, while the true real electron of atoms is the muon of 105MeV which is stuck inside a proton torus of 8 rings of 840MeV. This causes another huge mistake, for a mistake in physics usually has a cascade effect of more and more mistakes. When we take the true electron of atoms is the muon, means the Sun and stars shine not from fusion, but from that muon thrusting through the proton torus in a Faraday law of electricity and magnetism producing electrical energy. So our Sun shines from the Faraday law, not fusion. And this implies the Sun has gone into Red Giant phase with a solar radiation increase of 0.005% yearly increase. That implies all life on Earth is in danger of going extinct as the Sun becomes more and more Red Giant, and unless humanity moves out to Europa, humanity goes extinct.


Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09N18QPP1
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 3, 2021
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1139 KB
• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled

• Print length ‏ : ‎ 82 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled




y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

[Archimedes Plutonium]

Is Dr.Anurag Sharma,Dr.Babu Sujin B,Dr.Banerjee Varsha using TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS by Archimedes Plutonium for improved Calculus teaching, no vomiting in exams,no nervous breakdown, no torture chamber asks Kibo Parry-Volney


TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, AP seeks the super easiest calculus possible on Earth-- polynomials as the only valid functions-- thus, and therefore, making derivative and integral as easy as Power Rule- 14 year olds master calculus

Is MIT,Dr.Stanley,Dr.Stark,Dr.Strang using TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS by Archimedes Plutonium for improved Calculus teaching, no vomiting in exams,no nervous breakdown, no torture chamber asks Kibo Parry-Volney

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

Stanford University, math dept.

Gregory Brumfiel, Daniel Bump, Emmanuel Candès, Gunnar Carlsson, Moses Charikar, Sourav Chatterjee, Tom Church, Ralph Cohen, Brian Conrad, Brian Conrey, Amir Dembo, Persi Diaconis, Yakov Eliashberg, Robert Finn, Jacob Fox, Laura Fredrickson, Søren Galatius, George Schaeffer, Or Hershkovits, David Hoffman, Eleny Ionel, Renata Kallosh, Yitzhak Katznelson, Vladimir Kazeev, Michael Kemeny, Steven Kerckhoff, Susie Kimport, Jun Li, Tai-Ping Liu, Mark Lucianovic, Jonathan Luk, Frederick Manners, Rafe Mazzeo, James R. Milgram, Maryam Mirzakhani, Stefan Mueller, Christopher Ohrt, Donald Ornstein, George Papanicolaou, Lenya Ryzhik, Richard Schoen, Leon Simon, Rick Sommer, Kannan Soundararajan, Tadashi Tokieda, Cheng-Chiang Tsai, Ravi Vakil, András Vasy, Akshay Venkatesh, Jan Vondrák, Brian White, Wojciech Wieczorek, Jennifer Wilson, Alex Wright, Lexing Ying, Xuwen Zhu

Old Math makes and keeps Calculus as classroom torture chambers with their 1,000s of different functions yet the polynomial is the only valid function of math, and makes it super super easy to learn calculus

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, AP seeks the super easiest calculus possible on Earth-- polynomials as the only valid functions-- thus, and therefore, making derivative and integral as easy as Power Rule- 14 year olds master calculus

the 30 year nonstop stalker Kibo Parry Moroney-Volney
On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 5:37:32 PM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
>"goonclod failure of logic"

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS textbooks, makes calculus as easy as adding or subtracting 1 from exponent--only valid functions are polynomials contrast with mainstream--vomiting during exams, torture chamber and nervous breakdown by sado-masochist teachers. Old Math is thousands of different kook functions with thousands of different rules. AP Calculus is one function-- the polynomial for we care about truth in math, not on whether kooks of math become rich and famous off the suffering-backs of students put through a torture chamber that is present day calculus. If you come to math with a function that is not a polynomial, you have to convert it to a polynomial. Once converted, calculus is super super easy. But math professors seem to enjoy torturing students, not teaching them. Psychology teaches us that when a kook goes through a torture chamber and comes out of it as a math professor-- they want to be vindictive and sado masochists and love to torture others and put them through the same torture chamber that they went through. AP says-- stop this cycle of torture and teach TRUE CORRECT MATH.



TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, AP seeks the super easiest calculus possible on Earth-- polynomials as the only valid functions-- thus, and therefore, making derivative and integral as easy as Power Rule- 14 year olds master calculus

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS textbooks, makes calculus as easy as adding or subtracting 1 from exponent--only valid functions are polynomials contrast with mainstream--vomiting during exams, torture chamber and nervous breakdown by sado-masochist teachers. Old Math is thousands of different kook functions with thousands of different rules. AP Calculus is one function-- the polynomial for we care about truth in math, not on whether kooks of math become rich and famous off the suffering of students put through a torture chamber that is present day calculus. If you come to math with a function that is not a polynomial, you have to convert it to a polynomial. Once converted, calculus is super super easy. But math professors seem to enjoy torturing students, not teaching them.

Old Math calculus textbooks like Stewart are more than 1,000 pages long and they need that because they have a mindless thousand different functions and no valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. AP's calculus is less than 300 pages, because we have a valid geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus which demands the only valid function of math be a polynomial function. We can teach calculus in Junior High School for the calculus is reduced to adding or subtracting 1 from the exponent. The only hard part of calculus in New Math is to convert the boneheaded function into a polynomial that was brought to the table by the boneheaded math professor who thinks that a function does not need to be a polynomial.

AP calculus transforms the calculus classroom. It is no longer vomiting during exams. No longer a torture chamber for our students of youth, and no longer a nightmare nor nervous breakdown for our youthful students, who, all they ever wanted was the truth of mathematics.

Teaches that derivative predicts next point of function graph--silly Old Math has derivative as tangent to function graph unable to predict. The great power of Calculus is integral is area under function graph thus physics energy, and its prediction power of the derivative to predict the next future point of function graph thus making the derivative a "law of physics as predictor". Stupid Old Math makes the derivative a tangent line, while New Math makes the derivative the predictor of next point of function graph. No wonder no-one in Old Math could do a geometry, let alone a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for no-one in Old Math even had the mind to realize Calculus predicts the future point in the derivative.

AP has managed to make sci.math a battlefield where AP is alone on one side and every other poster is either a direct attack on AP or an indirect attack on AP such as Markus, Gabriel, Thomasson, WM trying to push AP off the front page. While over in sci.physics, the maintenance team at sci.physics still have control of the helm. But sci.math is without a helmsman and rudderless. Quite a spectacle, and time for a change of personnel ISP of sci.math to be at least like sci.physics. I do not know how much of this if any, is the fault of NSF Dr.Panchanathan, Kibo Parry Moron-ey-Volney, Tim Skirvin, Gilbert Strang...

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS-- only math textbooks with a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus--teaches that derivative predicts next point of function graph--silly Old Math has derivative as tangent to function graph unable to predict. This is why calculus is so important for physics, like a law of physics-- predicts the future given nearby point, predicts the next point. And of course the integral tells us the energy. Silly stupid Old Math understood the integral as area under the function graph curve, but were stupid silly as to the understanding of derivative-- predict the next point as seen in this illustration:


From this rectangle of the integral with points A, midpoint then B


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


To this trapezoid with points A, m, B

B
/|
/ |
m /----|
/ |
| |
|____|


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

Or going in reverse. From rectangle, the right triangle predicts the next successor point of function graph curve of B, from that of midpoint m and initial point of function graph A.


My 134th published book

Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The 134th book of AP, and belatedly late, for I had already written the series of TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS in a 7 volume, 8 book set. This would be the first book in that 8 book set (one of the books is a companion book to 1st year college). But I suppose that I needed to write the full series before I could write the Introduction and know what I had to talk about and talk about in a logical progression order. Sounds paradoxical in a sense, that I needed to write the full series first and then go back and write the Introduction. But in another sense, hard to write an introduction on something you have not really fully done and completed. For example to know what is error filled Old Math and to list those errors in a logical order requires me to write the full 7 volumes in order to list in order the mistakes.

Cover Picture: Mathematics begins with counting, with numbers, with quantity. But counting numbers needs geometry for something to count in the first place. So here in this picture of the generalized Hydrogen atom of chemistry and physics is a torus geometry of 8 rings of a proton torus and one ring where my fingers are, is a equator ring that is the muon and thrusting through the proton torus at the equator of the torus. So we count 9 rings in all. So math is created by atoms and math numbers exist because atoms have many geometry figures to count. And geometry exists because atoms have shapes and different figures.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B08K2XQB4M
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 24, 2020
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 576 KB

• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

• Print length ‏ : ‎ 23 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #224,974 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
◦ #23 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #182 in Calculus (Books)



#5-2, My 45th published book.

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 2 for ages 5 to 18, math textbook series, book 2
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon Kindle edition)

Last revision was 2NOV2020. And this is AP's 45th published book of science.

Preface: Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education.

This is a textbook series in several volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education starting age 5 up to age 26. Volume 2 is for age 5 year old to that of senior in High School, that is needed to do both science and math. Every other math book is incidental to this series of Teaching True Mathematics.

It is a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost on a daily basis. A unique first in education textbooks-- almost a continual overnight editing. Adding new text, correcting text. Volume 2 takes the 5 year old student through to senior in High School for their math education. Volume 3 carries the Freshperson in College for their math calculus education.

Cover Picture: The Numbers as Integers from 0 to 100, and 10 Grid when dividing by 10, and part of the 100 Grid when dividing by 100. Decimal Grid Numbers are the true numbers of mathematics. The Reals, the rationals & irrationals, the algebraic & transcendentals, the imaginary & Complex, and the negative-numbers are all fake numbers. For, to be a true number, you have to "be counted" by mathematical induction. The smallest Grid system is the Decimal 10 Grid.



Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07RG7BVZW
Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 2, 2019
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 2024 KB

Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

Print length ‏ : ‎ 423 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #235,426 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
#15 in General Geometry
#223 in Geometry & Topology (Books)


#5-3, 55th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 3 for age 18-19, 1st year College Calculus, math textbook series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Last revision was 25Jun2021. And this is AP's 55th published book of science.

Teaching True Mathematics, by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

Preface: This is volume 3, book 3 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Freshperson students, 1st year college students of age 18-19. It is the continuation of volume 2 for ages 5 through 18 years old.

The main major topic is the AP-EM equations of electricity and magnetism, the mathematics for the laws of electricity and magnetism; what used to be called the Maxwell Equations of Physics. The 1st Year College Math has to prepare all students with the math for all the sciences. So 1st year college Math is like a huge intersection station that has to prepare students with the math they need to do the hard sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geology, etc. What this means is, 1st year college is calculus that allows the student to work with electricity and magnetism. All the math that is needed to enable students to do electricity and magnetism. In Old Math before this textbook, those Old Math textbooks would end in 1/3 of the text about Arclength, vector space, div, curl, Line Integral, Green's, Stokes, Divergence theorem trying to reach and be able to teach Maxwell Equations. But sadly, barely any Old Math classroom reached that 1/3 ending of the textbook, and left all those college students without any math to tackle electricity and magnetism. And most of Old Math was just muddle headed wrong even if they covered the last 1/3 of the textbook. And that is totally unacceptable in science. This textbook fixes that huge hole and gap in Old Math education.

And there is no way around it, that a course in 1st year College Calculus is going to do a lot of hands on experiment with electricity and magnetism, and is required of the students to buy a list of physics apparatus-- multimeter, galvanometer, coil, bar magnet, alligator clip wires, electromagnet, iron filing case, and possibly even a 12 volt transformer, all shown in the cover picture. The beginning of this textbook and the middle section all leads into the ending of this textbook-- we learn the AP-EM Equations and how to use those equations. And there is no escaping the fact that it has to be hands on physics experiments in the classroom of mathematics.

But, do not be scared, for this is all easy easy easy. For if you passed and enjoyed Volume 2 TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS, then I promise you, you will not be stressed with Volume 3, for I go out of my way to make it clear and understandable.

Warning: this is a Journal Textbook, meaning that I am constantly adding new material, constantly revising, constantly fixing mistakes or making things more clear. So if you read this book in August of 2019, chances are it is different when you read it in September 2019. Ebooks allow authors the freedom to improve their textbooks on a ongoing basis.

The 1st year college math should be about the math that prepares any and all students for science, whether they branch out into physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, or math, they should have all the math in 1st year college that will carry them through those science studies. I make every attempt possible to make math easy to understand, easy to learn and hopefully fun.

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B07WN9RVXD
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ August 16, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1390 KB
• Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited

• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

• Print length ‏ : ‎ 236 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #1,377,070 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #411 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,480 in Calculus (Books)



#5-4, 56th published book

COLLEGE CALCULUS GUIDE to help students recognize math professor spam from math truth & reality// math textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition

by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)


#1 New Releasein 15-Minute Science & Math Short Reads


This textbook is the companion guide book to AP's Teaching True Mathematics, 1st year College. It is realized that Old Math will take a long time in removing their fake math, so in the interim period, this Guide book is designed to speed up the process of removing fake Calculus out of the education system, the fewer students we punish with forcing them with fake Calculus, the better we are.
Cover Picture: This book is part comedy, for when you cannot reason with math professors that they have many errors to fix, that 90% of their Calculus is in error, you end up resorting to comedy, making fun of them, to prod them to fix their errors. To prod them to "do right by the students of the world" not their entrenched propaganda.
Length: 54 pages


Product details
File Size: 1035 KB
Print Length: 64 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 18, 2019
Sold by: Amazon.com Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07WNGLQ85
Text-to-Speech: Enabled

X-Ray: 
Not Enabled 

Word Wise: Not Enabled

Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #253,425 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#38 in 90-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#318 in Calculus (Books)
#48 in Calculus (Kindle Store)


#5-5, 72nd published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 4 for age 19-20 Sophomore-year College, math textbook series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Preface: This is volume 4, book 5 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Sophomore-year students, students of age 19-20. It is the continuation of volume 3 in the end-goal of learning how to do the mathematics of electricity and magnetism, because everything in physics is nothing but atoms and atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. To know math, you have to know physics. We learned the Calculus of 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. But we did not learn the calculus of those equations for 3rd dimension. So, you can say that Sophomore year College math is devoted to 3D Calculus. This sophomore year college we fill in all the calculus, and we start over on all of Geometry, for geometry needs a modern day revision. And pardon me for this book is mostly reading, and the students doing less calculations. The classroom of this textbook has the teacher go through page by page to get the students comprehending and understanding of what is being taught. There are many hands on experiments also.

Cover Picture shows some toruses, some round some square, torus of rings, thin strips of rings or squares and shows them laid flat. That is Calculus of 3rd dimension that lays a ring in a torus to be flat in 2nd dimension.
Length: 105 pages

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0828M34VL
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2019
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 952 KB

• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

• Print length ‏ : ‎ 105 pages
• Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Best Sellers Rank: #242,037 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #36 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
◦ #219 in Calculus (Books)


#5-6, 75th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 5 for age 20-21 Junior-year of College, math textbook series, book 6 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2019

This is volume 5, book 6 of Teaching True Mathematics, designed for College Junior-year students, students of age 20-21. In first year college Calculus we learned calculus of the 2nd dimension and applied it to the equations of physics for electricity and magnetism. And in sophomore year we learned calculus of 3rd dimension to complete our study of the mathematics needed to do the physics of electricity and magnetism. Now, junior year college, we move onto something different, for we focus mostly on logic now and especially the logic of what is called the "mathematical proof". Much of what the student has learned about mathematics so far has been given to her or him as stated knowledge, accept it as true because I say so. But now we are going to do math proofs. Oh, yes, we did prove a few items here and there, such as why the Decimal Grid Number system is so special, such as the Pythagorean Theorem, such as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus with its right-triangle hinged up or down. But many ideas we did not prove, we just stated them and expected all students to believe them true. And you are now juniors in college and we are going to start to prove many of those ideas and teach you "what is a math proof". Personally, I myself feel that the math proof is overrated, over hyped. But the math proof is important for one reason-- it makes you better scientists of knowing what is true and what is a shaky idea. A math proof is the same as "thinking straight and thinking clearly". And all scientists need to think straight and think clearly. But before we get to the Mathematics Proof, we have to do Probability and Statistics. What you learned in Grade School, then High School, then College, called Sigma Error, now becomes Probability and Statistics. It is important because all sciences including mathematics needs and uses Probability and Statistics. So, our job for junior-year of college mathematics is all cut out and ahead for us, no time to waste, let us get going.

Cover Picture: is a sample of the Array Proof, a proof the ellipse is not a conic but rather a cylinder cut wherein the oval is the slant cut of a cone, not the ellipse.

Length: 175 pages


Product details
ASIN : B0836F1YF6
Publication date : December 26, 2019
Language : English
File size : 741 KB

Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled

Print length : 175 pages
Lending : Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #3,768,255 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #3,591 in Probability & Statistics (Kindle Store)
◦ #19,091 in Probability & Statistics (Books)



#5-7, 89th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 6 for age 21-22 Senior-year of College, math textbook series, book 7 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020

Last revision was 6Feb2021.
Preface: This is the last year of College for mathematics and we have to mostly summarize all of mathematics as best we can. And set a new pattern to prepare students going on to math graduate school. A new pattern of work habits, because graduate school is more of research and explore on your own. So in this final year, I am going to eliminate tests, and have it mostly done as homework assignments.

Cover Picture: Again and again, many times in math, the mind is not good enough alone to think straight and clear, and you need tools to hands-on see how it works. Here is a collection of tools for this senior year college classes. There is a pencil, clipboard, graph paper, compass, divider, protractor, slide-ruler. And for this year we spend a lot of time on the parallelepiped, showing my wood model, and showing my erector set model held together by wire loops in the corners. The plastic square is there only to hold up the erector set model.

Length: 110 pages

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B084V11BGY
Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 15, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 826 KB

Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled

Print length ‏ : ‎ 110 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,965 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #345 in Mathematics (Kindle Store)
◦ #373 in Physics (Kindle Store)
◦ #2,256 in Physics (Books)

#5-8, 90th published book

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 7 for age 22-26 Graduate school, math textbook series, book 8 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium 2020

Last revised 1NOV2020. This was AP's 90th published book of science.

Preface: This is College Graduate School mathematics. Congratulations, you made it this far. To me, graduate school is mostly research, research mathematics and that means also physics. So it is going to be difficult to do math without physics. Of course, we focus on the mathematics of these research projects.

My textbook for Graduate school is just a template and the professors teaching the graduate students are free of course to follow their own projects, but in terms of being physics and math combined. What I list below is a template for possible projects.

So, in the below projects, I list 36 possible research projects that a graduate student my like to undertake, or partake. I list those 36 projects with a set of parentheses like this (1), (2), (3), etc. Not to be confused with the chapters listing as 1), 2), 3), etc. I list 36 projects but the professor can offer his/her own list, and I expect students with their professor, to pick a project and to monitor the student as to his/her progresses through the research. I have listed each project then cited some of my own research into these projects, below each project is an entry. Those entries are just a help or helper in getting started or acquainted with the project. The entry has a date time group and a newsgroup that I posted to such as sci.math or plutonium-atom-universe Google newsgroups. Again the entry is just a help or helper in getting started.

Now instead of picking one or two projects for your Graduate years of study, some may select all 36 projects where you write a short paper on each project. Some may be bored with just one or two projects and opt for all 36.

Cover Picture: A photo by my iphone of a page on Permutations of the Jacobs book Mathematics: A Human Endeavor, 1970. One of the best textbooks ever written in Old Math, not for its contents because there are many errors, but for its teaching style. It is extremely rare to find a math textbook written for the student to learn. Probably because math professors rarely learned how to teach in the first place; only learned how to unintentionally obfuscate. The page I photographed is important because it is the interface between geometry's perimeter or surface area versus geometry's area or volume, respectively. Or, an interface of pure numbers with that of geometry. But I have more to say on this below.
Length: 296 pages

Product details
ASIN ‏ : ‎ B085DF8R7V
Publication date ‏ : ‎ March 1, 2020
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 828 KB

Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

Print length ‏ : ‎ 296 pages
Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Best Sellers Rank: #224,981 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #13 in General Geometry
◦ #213 in Geometry & Topology (Books)


#5-9, 221st published book

An Education Ladder Guideline for teaching mathematics and a Test to see if you are cut out to be a mathematician//Teaching True Mathematics
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)

Preface: This book is written to improve math education in school and at home. Trouble is, you cannot improve math education if the professors of mathematics have much of their teachings in error. So I write this book mostly as a test for math professors because to shine a light on math professor failure is the best way to improve math teaching, and thereby improve school curriculums especially colleges and universities. But others, such as laypersons are welcomed to join in. And it is the laypersons and students that will make the greatest amount of use of this book because math professors are usually stubborn and idiotic and hard to change for the better. And so when students and laypersons keep asking questions of their math professors, their brainwashing and thus poor teaching, they eventually come around to the truth and then change their bad behavior and bad misunderstanding; to proper true mathematics.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a rubber washer inside a plastic cone. The washer is at a steep slant angle to the cone perpendicular. Notice the washer near the apex is fully touching the side of the cone, but the washer directed towards the base has not yet cut through the side of the cone, and you can see a rainbow or a crescent shape of area where the washer will intersect the side of the cone, (where my two finger are), making a total figure of a Oval, never the ellipse. I was taking this picture as one person, so I had the iphone camera in one hand and the cone in another hand, and had to use a rubber washer to stay in place. The same green plastic cone used in this picture appears in both of my published books of the proof slant cut of cone is oval, never the ellipse.

My 3rd published book with the same green cone on cover.
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

My 68th published book with the same green cone on cover.
Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0BQDYMYKQ
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 16, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 551 KB

• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 65 pages



#5-10, 160th published book

MATHOPEDIA-- List of 82 fakes and mistakes of Old Math// mathematics & logic
by Archimedes Plutonium

Preface:
A Mathopedia is like a special type of encyclopedia on the subject of mathematics. It is about the assessment of the worth of mathematics and the subject material of mathematics. It is a overall examination and a evaluation of mathematics and its topics.

The ordering of Mathopedia is not a alphabetic ordering, nor does it have a index. The ordering is purely that of importance at beginning and importance at end.

The greatest use of Mathopedia is a guide to students of what not to waste your time on and what to focus most of your time. I know so many college classes in mathematics are just a total waste of time, waste of valuable time for the class is math fakery. I know because I have been there.

Now I am going to cite various reference sources of AP books if anyone wants more details and can be seen in the Appendix at the end of the book.

I suppose, going forward, mathematics should always have a mathopedia, where major parts of mathematics as a science are held under scrutiny and question as to correctness. In past history we have called these incidents as "doubters of the mainstream". Yet math, like physics, can have no permanent mainstream, since there is always question of correctness in physics, there then corresponds questions of correctness in mathematics (because math is a subset of physics). What I mean is that each future generation corrects some mistakes of past mathematics. If anyone is unsure of what I am saying here, both math and physics need constant correcting, of that which never belonged in science. This then converges with the logic-philosophy of Pragmatism (see AP's book of logic on Pragmatism).

Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09MZTLRL5 and ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ December 2, 2021
• Product details
• ASIN ‏ : ‎ B09ZWFLKHC
• Publication date ‏ : ‎ May 8, 2022
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• File size ‏ : ‎ 1154 KB

• Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
• Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
• X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
• Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled

• Sticky notes ‏ : ‎ On Kindle Scribe
• Print length ‏ : ‎ 71 pages

y z
| /
| /
|/______ x

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
2:12 AM (15 hours ago)



to
Alright I come to realize I have no graphic explanation for the proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus for a downward slope function graph. I gave a proof for the upward slope function.

We start with the integral rectangle in the Cell, a specific cell of the function graph. In 10 Decimal Grid there are exactly 100 cells for each number interval, say from 0 to 0.1, then the next cell is 0.1 to 0.2. The midpoint in each cell belongs to a number in the next higher Grid System, the 100 Grid. So the midpoint of cell 1.1 to 1.2 is 1.15 as midpoint.

Now the integral in that cell of 1.1 to 1.2 is a rectangle and say our function is x^2 --> Y. So the function graph is (1.1, 1.21) and (1.2, 1.44). Now we are strictly in 10 Grid borrowing from 100 Grid.

So say this is our Integral rectangle in cell 1.1 to 1.2.

_____
| |
| |
| |
| |
_____
1.1 1.2

More later,...

What I am getting at is that in a upward slope the right triangle whose tip is 1.44 hinged at the midpoint 1.15 predicts that future point in the derivative as the right triangle hypotenuse.

But the geometry is different for a downward slope function such as 10 -x --> Y. In this case we have the rectangle integral, but instead of hinging up the right triangle to predict the next point of the function graph, we totally remove the right triangle from the graph and the missing right-triangle is the successor point.

Teaches that derivative predicts next point of function graph--silly Old Math has derivative as tangent to function graph unable to predict. The great power of Calculus is integral is area under function graph thus physics energy, and its prediction power of the derivative to predict the next future point of function graph thus making the derivative a "law of physics as predictor". Stupid Old Math makes the derivative a tangent line, while New Math makes the derivative the predictor of next point of function graph. No wonder no-one in Old Math could do a geometry, let alone a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for no-one in Old Math even had the mind to realize Calculus predicts the future point in the derivative.
>
>
> TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS-- only math textbooks with a valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus--teaches that derivative predicts next point of function graph--silly Old Math has derivative as tangent to function graph unable to predict. This is why calculus is so important for physics, like a law of physics-- predicts the future given nearby point, predicts the next point. And of course the integral tells us the energy. Silly stupid Old Math understood the integral as area under the function graph curve, but were stupid silly as to the understanding of derivative-- predict the next point as seen in this illustration:
>
>
> From this rectangle of the integral with points A, midpoint then B
>
>
> ______
> | |
> | |
> | |
> ---------
>
>
> To this trapezoid with points A, m, B
>
> B
> /|
> / |
> m /----|
> / |
> | |
> |____|
>
>
> The trapezoid roof has to be a straight-line segment (the derivative)
> so that it can be hinged at m, and swiveled down to form rectangle for
> integral.
>
> Or going in reverse. From rectangle, the right triangle predicts the next successor point of function graph curve of B, from that of midpoint m and initial point of function graph A.
>

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
1:04 PM (4 hours ago)



to
In the case of a upward slope function, the derivative requires a midpoint in the integral rectangle for which the right triangle is hinged at the midpoint and raised to rest upon the 4 sided trapezoid that the rectangle becomes. Thus the vertex tip of right triangle predicts the next future point of the function graph by this vertex tip.

However, a different situation arises as the function graph has a downward slope. There is no raising of a right triangle cut-out of the integral rectangle. And there is no need for a midpoint on top wall of the integral rectangle. For a downward slope Function Graph, we cut-away a right triangle and discard it. Here the vertex tip is below the level of the entering function graph and is predicted by the derivative.

So there are two geometry accounting for the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus proof. There is the accounting of a function graph if the function has a upward slope and there is the accounting if the function graph is a downward slope. Both involve the Integral as a rectangle in a cell of whatever Grid System one is in. In 10 Grid there are 100 cells along the x-axis, in 100 Grid there are 100^2 cells. If the function is upward slope we need the midpoint of cell and the right triangle is hinged at that midpoint. If the function is downward slope, the right triangle is shaved off and discarded-- no midpoint needed and the resultant figure could end up being a rectangle becoming a triangle. In the upward slope function graph, the rectangle becomes a trapezoid, possibly even a triangle.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
3:32 PM (2 hours ago)



to
So for an upward slope function, the Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus would have the integral rectangle turned into this.

> ______
> | |
> | |
> | |
> ---------
>
>
> To this trapezoid with points A, m, B
>
> B
> /|
> / |
> m /----|
> / |
> | |
> |____|
>

While for a downward slope function, the Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus would have the integral rectangle turned into this.

______
|....... |
|....... |
|....... |
---------


|\
|...\
|....... |
---------

Where the right-triangle is now swiveled at midpoint but rather where a right triangle is cut-away from the Integral that is a rectangle and that right triangle is then discarded.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
11:18 PM (1 hour ago)



to
Now two of the most interesting and fascinating downward slope functions in 10 Grid of 1st Quadrant Only would be the quarter circle and the tractrix.

Many of us forget that functions are Sequence progressions, starting at 0 and moving through all 100 cells of the 10 Decimal Grid System.

Here, I have in mind for the quarter circle a radius of 10 to be all inclusive of the 10 Grid.

AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
11:27 AM (4 hours ago)



to
By insisting that the only valid function in the world is a polynomial function, we thus reduce Calculus to the ultra simple task of the Power Rule.

So we have a function of x^3, the derivative by Power Rule is (3)x^2. The integral by Power Rule is (1/4)x^4, and to check to see if integral is correct, we take the derivative of (1/4)x^4 to see if it becomes x^3, and surely it does so.

So what AP teaches math to the world, is that Calculus can be mastered by 13 and 14 year olds. Students just beginning High School.

Impossible in Old Math because Old Math is filled with mistakes and errors and crazy idiotic and stupid math.

In New Math, we clean house. We do not let creeps and kooks fill up math that causes students to have nightmares and nervous breakdowns and vomit before tests.

In New Math, we think only of our young students, we do not think of kooks like Dr.Hales, Dr.Tao, Dr. Wiles trying to achieve fame and fortune at the expense of our young students-- who, all they wanted was to learn the truth of mathematics.

If you run to a teacher of New Math with a function, and that function is not a polynomial, then the teacher is going to tell you "that is not a valid function, and you simply convert it to a polynomial".

In AP math class in 9th grade USA, AP makes students of 13 and 14 year old master Calculus. Master calculus better, far better than 1st year college students in Old Math at any college or university across the globe.

14 year old students in AP math class master calculus and "have fun and joy" in math class.

19 or 20 year olds in colleges and universities go through nightmares, vomiting, and even nervous breakdowns in their learning calculus.

I am not exaggerating here, but obvious observations of education of mathematics.

No-one in math education cares about students in Old Math. No-one has ever Cleaned House of Old Math, but let the rotten fetid Old Math stench increase.

AP, King of Science
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
3:56 AM (10 hours ago)



to

Now I need to add more to the Power Rules of Calculus as we make Polynomials be the only valid functions of mathematics. If you come to math with a function not a polynomial, you are sent home to convert your silly contraption into a polynomial over a interval in 1st Quadrant Only, a interval of concern.

But in all the years I did calculus, I seem to not have registered in my mind the geometrical significance of the Power Rules. What is the geometry of taking x^2 to the power rule of n(x^n-1) for derivative. Then what is the geometry significance of taking the integral power rule-- (1/(n+1)) (x^(n+1)).

It seems to me that at one moment in time, that geometry stuck to my mind, but is now elusive, I cannot recall the geometry significance of either Power Rule when played out on x^n.

Cavalieri 1598-1647

So that if we start with a polynomial function such as x^2 -> Y, we instantly know from the power rules that the derivative is 2x and the integral is 1/3x^3.

Derivative Power Rule of a polynomial x^n that the derivative is n(x^n-1).

The Integral Power Rule is sort of the opposite of the derivative rule so for polynomial x^n that the integral is (1/(n+1)) (x^(n+1)).

On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 3:00:37 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Now I need to add more to the Power Rules of Calculus as we make Polynomials be the only valid functions of mathematics. If you come to math with a function not a polynomial, you are sent home to convert your silly contraption into a polynomial over a interval in 1st Quadrant Only, a interval of concern.
>
> But in all the years I did calculus, I seem to not have registered in my mind the geometrical significance of the Power Rules. What is the geometry of taking x^2 to the power rule of n(x^n-1) for derivative. Then what is the geometry significance of taking the integral power rule-- (1/(n+1)) (x^(n+1)).
>
> It seems to me that at one moment in time, that geometry stuck to my mind, but is now elusive, I cannot recall the geometry significance of either Power Rule when played out on x^n.
>
> Cavalieri 1598-1647
>
> So that if we start with a polynomial function such as x^2 -> Y, we instantly know from the power rules that the derivative is 2x and the integral is 1/3x^3.
>
> Derivative Power Rule of a polynomial x^n that the derivative is n(x^n-1).
>
> The Integral Power Rule is sort of the opposite of the derivative rule so for polynomial x^n that the integral is (1/(n+1)) (x^(n+1)).

Now I need to include the Cavalieri proof, a geometry proof that rectangles under a function graph such as Y--> x^2 yields the power rule formula (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1)) so for x^2 the integral is (1/3)x^3.

I would think that showing Cavalieri's proof would be standard fare in all 1st year college calculus textbooks. To my surprise, not Stewart, not Apostol, not Fisher& Zieber, not Ellis & Gulick, not Strang, no-one is up to the task of showing how Cavalieri got that formula from summing rectangles.

Morris Kline in volume 1 "Mathematical Thought" shows a picture.

Stillwell in "Mathematics and its History" shows a picture.

But it must be too difficult for college authors to replicate Cavalieri's proof of approximating rectangles for x^2.

Now if I were back in the days of Cavalieri and tasked to find a formula, I would do rectangles and trial and error. First finding a formula for easy ones such as Y--> x, then Y-->x^2, then a third trial, Y--> 2x to see if the formula is good, sort of a math induction settling upon (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1)).

But I am very disappointed that none of my college calculus books derives the formula (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1)) via approximation.


There were no standards for math proof in the days of Cavalieri for his genius of deriving the Integral Power rule. Y--> x^n is integral (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1))

So what I am going to do is prove (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1)) in New Math.

I looked through the literature and there was no actual Old Math proof of (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1))

This is worthy of a whole entire new book of itself.

And the beauty is that it is a Mathematical Induction proof.

And the beauty also is that functions are chains of straightline connections from one point to the next in Discrete Geometry.

That means we no longer approximate the integral but actually derive the Integral from a Right Trapezoid whose area is 1/2(base_1 + base_2)(height).

We see that in a function such as 3x becomes integral (1/2)(3)x^2 due to that right-trapezoid area.

The right-trapezoid is such that its base_1 and base_2 are the Y points for cells of calculus in Decimal Grid Systems.

Trouble in Old Math is when the "so called historian" reads a passage in old works, they become overgenerous in crediting a proof when none really existed -- Fermat, Cavalieri. And this is the reason that no-one in modern times who wrote a Calculus textbook features the Cavalieri Integral Power Rule, because there never was a proof, .... until now... a Mathematical Induction proof.

AP, King of Science

None of this is a proof of Cavalieri's integral power rule formula. Because Geometry is discrete and all curves in geometry are chains of straightline segments. The Internet boasts of some modern recent proofs of Cavalieri, but I suspect all those are bogus claims, being victims of computer graphics and no honest down to earth proof at all. I myself was a victim of computer graphics, for a computer can really spit out any image you ask it to spit out, such as hexagon tiling of sphere surface.

--- quoting Wikipedia ---
The modern proof is to use an antiderivative: the derivative of xn is shown to be nxn−1 – for non-negative integers. This is shown from the binomial formula and the definition of the derivative – and thus by the fundamental theorem of calculus the antiderivative is the integral. This method fails for
∫1/x dx
which is undefined due to division by zero. The logarithm function, which is the actual antiderivative of 1/x, must be introduced and examined separately.


The derivative
(x^n)'=nx^{n-1} can be geometrized as the infinitesimal change in volume of the n-cube, which is the area of n faces, each of dimension n − 1.
Integrating this picture – stacking the faces – geometrizes the fundamental theorem of calculus, yielding a decomposition of the n-cube into n pyramids, which is a geometric proof of Cavalieri's quadrature formula.
For positive integers, this proof can be geometrized: if one considers the quantity xn as the volume of the n-cube (the hypercube in n dimensions), then the derivative is the change in the volume as the side length is changed – this is xn−1, which can be interpreted as the area of n faces, each of dimension n − 1 (fixing one vertex at the origin, these are the n faces not touching the vertex), corresponding to the cube increasing in size by growing in the direction of these faces – in the 3-dimensional case, adding 3 infinitesimally thin squares, one to each of these faces. Conversely, geometrizing the fundamental theorem of calculus, stacking up these infinitesimal (n − 1) cubes yields a (hyper)-pyramid, and n of these pyramids form the n-cube, which yields the formula. Further, there is an n-fold cyclic symmetry of the n-cube around the diagonal cycling these pyramids (for which a pyramid is a fundamental domain). In the case of the cube (3-cube), this is how the volume of a pyramid was originally rigorously established: the cube has 3-fold symmetry, with fundamental domain a pyramids, dividing the cube into 3 pyramids, corresponding to the fact that the volume of a pyramid is one third of the base times the height. This illustrates geometrically the equivalence between the quadrature of the parabola and the volume of a pyramid, which were computed classically by different means.

Alternative proofs exist – for example, Fermat computed the area via an algebraic trick of dividing the domain into certain intervals of unequal length; alternatively, one can prove this by recognizing a symmetry of the graph y = xn under inhomogeneous dilation (by d in the x direction and dn in the y direction, algebraicizing the n dimensions of the y direction), or deriving the formula for all integer values by expand
--- end quoting Wikipedia on Cavalieri's quadrature formula ---

--- quoting Google Search hits ---

A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula

JSTOR
https://www.jstor.org › stable
by NJ Wildberger · 2002 · Cited by 5 — Theorem of Calculus. Here is a proof of Cavalieri's formula that uses the (hidden) symmetry of the func- tion x" and the Binomial ...

A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula

ResearchGate
https://www.researchgate.net › publication › 266256869...
PDF | On Nov 1, 2002, N. J. Wildberger published A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ...

(PDF) A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula

Academia.edu
https://www.academia.edu › A_New_Proof_of_Cavali...
We use the contemporary mathematical technologies to prove the fundamental assumptions of the Euclidean Goemetry with indivisibles and we develop a model- ...

12.A. The proof of Cavalieri's Principle

University of California, Riverside
https://math.ucr.edu › ~res › math153-2019
pdf, Cavalieri's Principle is a powerful method for comparing the volumes of two solids in 3-space. The purpose of this document is to discuss the steps needed.
2 pages

A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula

Taylor & Francis Online
https://www.tandfonline.com › ... › Volume 109, Issue 9
by NJ Wildberger · 2002 · Cited by 5 — A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula. The American Mathematical Monthly: Vol. 109, No. 9, pp. 843-845.

Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula

Wolfram MathWorld
https://mathworld.wolfram.com › CavalierisQuadratur...
Wildberger, N. J. "A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula." Amer. Math. Monthly 109, 843-845, 2002. Referenced on Wolfram|Alpha. Cavalieri's Quadrature ...

A geometric proof of Cavalieri's quadrature formula
Oocities
http://www.oocities.org › ilanpi › cavalieri
Wildberger, A new proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula, American Math. Monthly 109, November 2002. 76 rue Mazarine. 75006 Paris. France. ila...@mail.com.

Proving the Cavalieri Principle using integrals (Calculus I)

Mathematics Stack Exchange
https://math.stackexchange.com › questions › proving...
Dec 28, 2019 — Cavalieri's Principle states that if a family of parallel planes gives equal cross-sectional areas for two solids S1 and S2, then the volumes of ...
1 answer

·

Top answer:
I think it depends on what is referred to as a solid here. Considering a solid being somehow space bounded and the volume being a continuous sum of positive ...
Related searches
Cavalieri quadrature proofs pdf
cavalieri's principle proof
cavalieri's principle formula
cavalieri principle measure theory
cavalieri's principle worksheet pdf
cavalieri's principle geometry
fundamental theorem of calculus proof
proof of integration

On Optimal Quadrature Formulae

Emis.de
https://www.emis.de › HOA › JIA › Volume5_3
by F LANZARA · Cited by 48 — THEOREM 2.1 There exists a unique quadratureformula oftype (1.4)- ... Compare the last quadrature formula with the composite Cavalieri-. Simpson's rule.
25 pages

Cavalieri's method of indivisibles

Tel Aviv University
http://www.tau.ac.il › download › Andersen
by K ANDERSEN · Cited by 178 — These theorems he applies in Books III, IV and V where he deals with quadratures and cubatures related to conic sections. The sixth book is mainly devoted to ...
77 pages

[PDF] Remark on Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula

Semantic Scholar
https://www.semanticscholar.org › paper
May 3, 2005 — Every calculus student learns Cavalieri's quadrature formula for the antiderivative of x^n (integer n). We observe here that the logarithmic ...
Images for Cavalieri quadrature proofs
Guided Search Filters
Filter by feature

bonaventura cavalieri

indefinite integrals

mathematics

definite integral

geometry

quadrature formula
Cavalieri's quadrature formula - Wikipedia
Cavalieri's quadrature formula - Wikipedia
Indefinite integrals? Cavalieri’s quadrature? Complex analysis? | DIw/oI #6
Video
Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula -- from Wolfram MathWorld
PDF) Remark on Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula
Cavalieri's Principle
Video
Indefinite integrals? Cavalieri's quadrature? Complex ...
Cavalieri's principle - Wikipedia
How do we derive the Newton-Cotes quadrature integration ...
PDF) A New Proof of Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula
View all
Feedback
View all

How do mathematicians come up with proofs, seemingly out of ...

Quora
https://beautifulmath.quora.com › How-do-mathematicia...
Thinking this way he came up with an excellent derivation of the basic rule of integration, Cavalieri's Quadrature Formula: \displaystyle \int_0^a x^n…
--- end of Google search hits ---

AP writes: well Cavalieri never had a proof of integral power rule and many historians of math could never recognize a proof from the side of a barn, a big barn, mind you.

What Cavalieri had was a "argument" in support of (1/(n+1))(x^(n+1)), not a proof. And from what I can decipher of Wildberger's claim, is all mouth and no substance. Much like Wiles on FLT, or Tao on primes, or Hales on Kepler Packing. The desire of fame and fortune is overwhelming for some in mathematics, and trample all over truth.

AP

Now by predict, I meant specifically the derivative with upward slope, where you slice a right triangle into the integral rectangle and lift it up upon the midpoint and the vertex of the right triangle predicts the next point of the function graph.

But things work differently for a downward slope function graph for you slice away an entire right triangle from the integral rectangle to obtain the successor point- the predicted point by the derivative.

> From this rectangle of the integral with points A, midpoint then B
>
>
> ______
> | |
> | |
> | |
> ---------
>
>
> To this trapezoid with points A, m, B
>
> B
> /|
> / |
> m /----|
> / |
> | |
> |____|
>
>
> The trapezoid roof has to be a straight-line segment (the derivative)
> so that it can be hinged at m, and swiveled down to form rectangle for
> integral.
>

Yes, in the case of a upward slope function, the derivative requires a midpoint in the integral rectangle for which the right triangle is hinged at the midpoint and raised to rest upon the 4 sided trapezoid that the rectangle becomes. Thus the vertex tip of right triangle predicts the next future point of the function graph by this vertex tip.
>
> However, a different situation arises as the function graph has a downward slope. There is no raising of a right triangle cut-out of the integral rectangle. And there is no need for a midpoint on top wall of the integral rectangle. For a downward slope Function Graph, we cut-away a right triangle and discard it. Here the vertex tip is below the level of the entering function graph and is predicted by the derivative.
>
> So there are two geometry accounting for the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus proof. There is the accounting of a function graph if the function has a upward slope and there is the accounting if the function graph is a downward slope. Both involve the Integral as a rectangle in a cell of whatever Grid System one is in. In 10 Grid there are 100 cells along the x-axis, in 100 Grid there are 100^2 cells. If the function is upward slope we need the midpoint of cell and the right triangle is hinged at that midpoint. If the function is downward slope, the right triangle is shaved off and discarded-- no midpoint needed and the resultant figure could end up being a rectangle becoming a triangle. In the upward slope function graph, the rectangle becomes a trapezoid, possibly even a triangle.
>
We have a different situation for a downward slope function graph for we do not need the midpoint, as a downward slope can slice away at most 1/2 of the integral rectangle.

> So for an upward slope function, the Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus would have the integral rectangle turned into this.
>
> > ______
> > | |
> > | |
> > | |
> > ---------
> >
> >
> > To this trapezoid with points A, m, B
> >
> > B
> > /|
> > / |
> > m /----|
> > / |
> > | |
> > |____|
> >
>
> While for a downward slope function, the Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus would have the integral rectangle turned into this.
>
> ______
> |....... |
> |....... |
> |....... |
> ---------
>
>
> |\
> |...\
> |....... |
> ---------
>
> Where the right-triangle is now swiveled at midpoint but rather where a right triangle is cut-away from the Integral that is a rectangle and that right triangle is then discarded.
>
>
Yes, now two of the most interesting and fascinating downward slope functions in 10 Grid of 1st Quadrant Only would be the quarter circle and the tractrix.


Let me run a scenario for you, please.

There are 7-8 billion people on Earth today.

In the past 50 years we can roughly say that 50 million people studied Calculus in school or at home.

50 million people tried and attempted to learn calculus math.

I certainly was one amoung that 50 million.

And was AP the only one in 50 million to recognize that if you take polynomials as being the Only Valid Function that the Calculus becomes the Easiest, Super Easy math, because the Power Rules apply and where the derivative is simply a subtract 1 from exponent and the integral is add 1 to exponent.

I find it extremely sad and hard to believe that only AP saw how to make Calculus Super super super easy? Surely there must have been at least 25 million of those 50 million who found the derivative and integral of polynomials a joy and pleasure to do. Surely AP was not the only person in 50 million to see the Polynomial Calculus was a pleasure, fun and even exciting, rush to class to do a derivative or integral of a polynomial-- teacher, please give me more polynomial exercises. They are better than Star Trek on TV.

This is the whole point of a Revolution in Math Calculus.

When we make the only valid function in all of math be a Polynomial, we reduce calculus to adding 1 or subtracting 1.

We do not allow creeps, goons and kooks to clutter the table of math and calculus with their horrible awful smelly functions which are not polynomials. No, we disband these kooks and tell them go home and convert your worthless crap to be a polynomial before you can stink up the halls of mathematics. Convert your kook nonsense to a polynomial then you can come and do mathematics with us.

AP, King of Science

As a case in point, a mere example.

We have at MIT a Dr. Gilbert Strang with his Calculus textbooks, and I bought the 1991 edition of Calculus. And my opinion of Strang's text is scatterbrained. For I often find that Gilbert in lecturing on a topic is too quick to bring in side show issues, never focusing on just one topic.

But worst of this Strang text is he has no valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus FTC, no geometry proof and his Limit analysis of FTC is idiot of a proof-- ie-- no proof at all, for we all analyze things in the course of a day, and none of us are so preposterous as to think we have proven something above and beyond analyzing that something.

And so, I, AP reflects back to the time of 1968, when my name was Ludwig Hansen, sitting in a geology classroom of University of Cincinnati. Learning geology from a textbook that never discusses Continental Drift and this is 1968, mind you and Wegener had given massive evidence of Continental Drift way back to 1915, some 53 years later, AP and the classroom suffering from Truth of Science by having to buy a book about static-Earth, being tested graded lectured upon fake geology.

Not much difference from students sitting in classrooms at MIT or elsewhere buying Strang's CALCULUS with no valid proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, and where any fool function is allowed to enter, thousands and thousands of fool functions, when Mathematics has only one Valid Function-- the Polynomial function. For you can only arrive at a True Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus by using polynomials as functions.

So how many students every year are punished by having to learn calculus with fool functions, with no valid proof of FTC. Where the calculus classroom puts students not through a Pleasure learning session but a gauntlet torture chamber, whipping the students into nervous breakdowns and vomiting during exams.

All for what??? How much money does Dr. Strang make from his awful book Calculus?? Let me guess estimate.

The book probably costs $100 in our inflation environment. And typically a author gets 1/2 of that in royalties.

Say MIT teaches a class of 100 students in calculus per year would be 50 x 100 = $5,000. And say a estimate that around the world there are 100 schools teaching from this book of 100 students in their classroom would make Gilbert $500,000 per year in book sales of his Calculus.

Same can be said of AP back in 1968 having to learn fake geology with no Continental Drift plate tectonics, so that some so called scientists reaps a reward of 1/2 a million dollars in book sales. And that thousands of students taught lectured and tested upon fake geology.

This is one of the grand benefits of a Usenet and a Internet, that we speed up the process of throwing out Fake -Math, fake-geology and all other fake sciences. Freedom of Speech of Internet of Usenet allows for science to be Showered, Cleaned UP, bathed from its wretched stink of Old fake science. Clean Up their science.

The only valid functions in mathematics are Polynomial Functions, which in turn, makes Calculus be super super super easy. No more vomiting by students in a calculus exam. No more nervous breakdowns by students taking calculus.

AP, King of Science

[Volney]

Snail of Math and Slug of Physics Archimedes "The Antifessor" Plutonium
<plutonium....@gmail.com> fails at math and science:

>
> My 134th published book
>
> Introduction to TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: Volume 1 for ages 5 through 26, math textbook series, book 1 Kindle Edition
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Why do you keep trying to brainwash little 5 year old kids?



WARNING TO STUDENTS, PARENTS and TEACHERS: Archimedes Plutonium is
offering to teach your children his broken physics and math. BEWARE! He
will corrupt the minds of your children! Mr. Plutonium is not content to
be a failure of math and physics all by himself. He wants everyone else
to fail as well! He teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as
atoms contain the unstable muon, water is H4O and not H2O, the ellipse
isn't a conic section, there are no negative numbers and no complex
numbers, that a sine wave isn't sinusoidal but semicircles, cycloids or
parabolas (depending on his mood), plus many, many other instances of
bad math and physics.

Plutonium has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books
on Usenet. That has failed until now, perhaps in part due to the fact
Usenet is an old, dying medium, which few modern 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 teach false Boolean logic such as 10 AND
2 = 12. His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a
false statement that nobody believes, such as 10 OR 2 = 12, say that it
is false (which it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another
similar false statement such as 10 AND 2 = 12, in order to really
confuse future computer scientists. Plutonium is taking advantage of the
fact that AND means different things in Boolean logic and elementary
arithmetic, as AND is an informal synonym for plus/addition. It is
important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by modern computers, 10 OR 2 = 10 and 10 AND 2 = 2.
Of course in pure Boolean logic the only possible values are true and
false (1 or 0), so in pure Boolean logic the statements "10 AND 2" and
"10 OR 2" don't even make sense. Don't let evil Plutonium's bad logic
confuse you!

Plutonium has been targeting children as young as 5. A new attempt to
corrupt the minds of young children is to teach that the alphabet has 12
letters, 6 vowels and 6 consonants. This sounds like a great way to
keep our children from reading!

Nobody knows why Plutonium wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like
this. Perhaps Plutonium is envious of their potential success, which he
never had because he is a failure at math and science. Plutonium is not
content to be a failure at math and physics all by himself. He wants
everyone to fail as well. Some claim Plutonium is an agent of China, in
order for China to dominate the world economy. Maybe he is a minion of
Kim Jong Un of North Korea. Most likely, however, he is an agent of
Putin and Russia, since Plutonium has previously attempted to summon
Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new, true mathematics" in an attempt
to destroy mathematics.

Additionally, Plutonium has started a Cult of Failure. He is trying to
convince students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of
Failure. This cult is anti-science and anti-mathematics. Its only goal
is to promote failure in math and science.

There is some evidence this Cult of Failure may be a suicide cult.
Plutonium has advocated that the "good guy" nations join into a
supernation and threaten to "flatten" the (nuclear armed) "bad guy"
nations who misbehave. The idea may to initiate an all-out nuclear
war when "bad guy" nations retaliate. Not simply is Plutonium or his
cult committing suicide but would take Planet Earth with them. As the
war in Ukraine continues, Plutonium keeps asking NATO to attack the
Russians, starting a nuclear WW3, which he feels is unavoidable. More
evidence of Plutonium's Cult of Failure being a suicide cult.

Plutonium is now encouraging resistance fighters fighting the regimes
in Russia and Iran to attack power lines in Tehran and Moscow by
carrying long vertical aluminum poles under them, presumably to short
them out, complete with a diagram. Obviously, this will not end well
for for the resistance fighter. The question is, did he do this because
he is Putin's stooge trying to kill off resistance fighters? Or is this
part of Plutonium's Suicide Cult of Failure, meaning this is merely a
suggestion how to commit suicide while failing to harm the regimes? Or
both?

But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you one of his
dangerous books. Especially now since they are available for free from
otherwise legitimate Amazon.