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

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all

by Archimedes Plutonium

12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall

PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon

1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.

2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.

Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?

Quoting

Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages

Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---

3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.

4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.

--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---

So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.

--- end Quote ---

5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.

6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.

7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.

8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.

9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.

10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.

But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.

11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---

So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.

But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.

And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.

But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.

Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.

So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.

So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.

Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.

So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.

12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon

Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.

Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.

New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.

Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.

New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.

How is that a proof the electron = muon?

Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.

Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.

In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.

Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.

For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs

/\
O

Where the leafs start out as ||

Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.

Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()

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

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?

Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.

MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.

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

President Larry Summers

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

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

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

Michael Moroney

2018-01-23 16:27:23 UTC

Autistic Archie Plutonium writes:

<snip>

The usual "12 Failures of Plutonium" + personal attack + stalking of
Harvard professors.

You succumbed to your autism again, I see. Better luck next time.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-13 03:12:32 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
<snip>
The usual "12 Failures of Plutonium" + personal attack + stalking of
Harvard professors.
You succumbed to your autism again, I see. Better luck next time.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-01 07:33:15 UTC

Alzheimer

Path: t131ni2957wmt.0!nntp.google.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ***@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)

Kenneth G. Wilson,James Watson Cronin,Val Logsdon Fitch,Sheldon Lee Glashow is Moroney giving away supersonic missile tech of MIT to Russia?? Too stupid to learn proton is 840MeV, real electron was 105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

AP writes: Reason I ask if kibo Moroney is a traitor and agent of Russia is because he has stu.neva.ru in his address. And likely MIT and CMU are working on missile technology

Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT vs. Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

CMU versus MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs Harvard physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, MIT physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

The world no longer needs physics professors who cannot understand Angular Momentum and that the Chemical bond cannot exist with proton = 938MeV, electron= .5MeV. The true proton is 840MeV, true electron= muon = 105MeV and the little particle of .5MeV that JJ Thomson discovered is actually Dirac's magnetic monopole.

Math Failure

Was he too much of a failure way
back then as well?

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the loud mouth idiot hatemonger nonstop, stalker. I post under the name Moroney or kibo or dozens of other fake names for hatred is my game, not science. I love it when Usenet was created because I was a bully but did not want to be pommeled into the ground for spitting hatred on people and Usenet allows me to spit hatred 24 hours 360 days. I am a hate monger who hates people and hates science-- for I am a worthless shithead of a living being-Moroney. As kibo Moroney shein, I want to teach new kids on the block how to pester, harass, authors, just as I have done for 26 years-- the new kids of Dan Christensen, Jan Burse (if not in prison), Zelos Malum, qwbr, Jan Bielawski, Erik Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, Franz, teach them how to be a shithead just like me.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

Moroney math failure, here is where the fool thinks 938 is short of 945 by 12%, and he pretends he is an electrical engineer. Perhaps the first e.e. in the world that cannot do a percentage correctly

Carnegie Mellon Univ. math dept
Jeremy Avigad, Steve Awodey, Egon Balas, Manuel Blum, Tom Bohman, Boris Bukh, Clinton Conley, Gerard P. Cornuejols, James Cummings, Irene Fonseca, Florian Frick, Alan Frieze, Rami Grossberg, Yu Gu, William J. Hrusa, Gautam Iyer, David Kinderlehrer, Dmitry Kramkov, John P. Lehoczky, Giovanni Leoni, Po-Shen Loh, Johannes Muhle-Karbe, Wesley Pegden, Robert Pego, Javier Pena, Agoston Pisztora, Hayden Schaeffer, Jack Schaeffer, Ernest Schimmerling, Steven E. Shreve, Dejan Slepcev, Richard Statman, Shlomo Ta'asan, Ian Tice, Tomasz Tkocz, Noel J. Walkington, Franziska Weber

president cmu: Farnum Jahanian, computer science

MIT math dept.

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

President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

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

LIST of Failed Physicists because they still believe electron is .5MeV, in no order

Peter Higgs
Rainer Weiss
Kip S. Thorne
Barry C. Barish
David J. Thouless
F. Duncan M. Haldane
John M. Kosterlitz
Takaaki Kajita
Arthur B. McDonald
Francois Englert
Saul Perlmutter
Brian P. Schmidt
Adam G. Riess
Makoto Kobayashi
Toshihide Maskawa
Yoichiro Nambu
John C. Mather
George F. Smoot
Roy J. Glauber
David J. Gross
Hugh David Politzer
Frank Wilczek
Raymond Davis Jr.
Masatoshi Koshiba
Riccardo Giacconi
Gerardus 't Hooft
Martinus J.G. Veltman
Jerome I. Friedman
Henry W. Kendall
Richard E. Taylor
Carlo Rubbia
Simon van der Meer
William Alfred Fowler
Kenneth G. Wilson
James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch
Sheldon Lee Glashow
Steven Weinberg
.
.
little fishes
.
.
layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = 1 while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV

Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
more and more layers of error thinking physics
.
.
John Baez
Brian Greene
Lisa Randall
Alan H. Guth
Michael E. Brown
Konstantin Batygin
Ben Bullock
Larry Harson
Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
Edward Witten

Yes, what did they say-- the power of Sun and stars is not really fusion but is the Faraday Law inside of atoms creating monopoles and turning Space into energy that fuels the Sun and stars. My rough estimate is that fusion only supplies 10% or less of Sun and stars.

But of course, I could not have discovered the true starpower when under the silly idea that the electron was a mere .5MeV when it truly is 105 MeV.

In that manner, physics departments are racist physicists for the knowledge that Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840 MeV, and the .5MeV was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole is going on 2 years now in the public eye starting 2017, yet none of these physicists (these poor physicists lacking understanding of angular momentum has raised a single peep). The reason they keep their mouths shut, is because they are so poor in physics, they do not want to be embarrassed. These gentlemen and ladies are not physicists, for a real physicist would debate the issue, not hide from the issue. And real physicist would not discount a discovery because of the person-- Archimedes Plutonium who discovered it.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-01 16:05:36 UTC

Alzheimer

Edward Witten,John Baez,Peter Higgs,Rainer Weiss is Moroney giving away supersonic missile tech of MIT to Russia?? Too stupid to learn proton is 840MeV, real electron was 105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole
- hide quoted text -

AP writes: Reason I ask if kibo Moroney is a traitor and agent of Russia is because he has stu.neva.ru in his address. And likely MIT and CMU are working on missile technology

Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT vs. Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

CMU versus MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs Harvard physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, MIT physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

The world no longer needs physics professors who cannot understand Angular Momentum and that the Chemical bond cannot exist with proton = 938MeV, electron= .5MeV. The true proton is 840MeV, true electron= muon = 105MeV and the little particle of .5MeV that JJ Thomson discovered is actually Dirac's magnetic monopole.

Math Failure

Was he too much of a failure way
back then as well?

President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)
MIT physics dept
William Bertozzi, Robert Birgeneau, Hale Bradt, Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins , Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young

LIST OF Failed Physicists, in no order

Peter Higgs
Rainer Weiss
Kip S. Thorne
Barry C. Barish
David J. Thouless
F. Duncan M. Haldane
John M. Kosterlitz
Takaaki Kajita
Arthur B. McDonald
Francois Englert
Saul Perlmutter
Brian P. Schmidt
Adam G. Riess
Makoto Kobayashi
Toshihide Maskawa
Yoichiro Nambu
John C. Mather
George F. Smoot
Roy J. Glauber
David J. Gross
Hugh David Politzer
Frank Wilczek
Raymond Davis Jr.
Masatoshi Koshiba
Riccardo Giacconi
Gerardus 't Hooft
Martinus J.G. Veltman
Jerome I. Friedman
Henry W. Kendall
Richard E. Taylor
Carlo Rubbia
Simon van der Meer
William Alfred Fowler
Kenneth G. Wilson
James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch
Sheldon Lee Glashow
Steven Weinberg
.
.
little fishes
.
.
layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = 1 while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV

Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
more and more layers of error thinking physics
.
.
John Baez
Brian Greene
Lisa Randall
Alan H. Guth
Michael E. Brown
Konstantin Batygin
Ben Bullock
Larry Harson
Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
Edward Witten

Yes, what did they say-- the power of Sun and stars is not really fusion but is the Faraday Law inside of atoms creating monopoles and turning Space into energy that fuels the Sun and stars. My rough estimate is that fusion only supplies 10% or less of Sun and stars.

But of course, I could not have discovered the true starpower when under the silly idea that the electron was a mere .5MeV when it truly is 105 MeV.

In that manner, physics departments are racist physicists for the knowledge that Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840 MeV, and the .5MeV was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole is going on 2 years now in the public eye starting 2017, yet none of these physicists (these poor physicists lacking understanding of angular momentum has raised a single peep). The reason they keep their mouths shut, is because they are so poor in physics, they do not want to be embarrassed. These gentlemen and ladies are not physicists, for a real physicist would debate the issue, not hide from the issue. And real physicist would not discount a discovery because of the person-- Archimedes Plutonium who discovered it.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Michael Moroney

2019-03-01 20:09:55 UTC

Subject: Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard,
teach percentages correctly??--

AlzheimerPlutonium, you are still mad at me for catching your math mistake?

FAIL!

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-05 16:46:02 UTC

Alzheimer

AP writes: The Moroney Stalker SONG

SONG( played with a light rapp and reggae music beat)

Stalk, stalk stalk Moroney, crock, crock, crock

SAGA I

Moroney has a feeble mind-brain
Your conic cut is just insane
For a slant cut in cone is an oval
Your moron brain is a joke-offal
You failed the ellipse, and too stupid for the plane
For you are just simply totally insane

Why you stalk, stalk stalk, you
worthless crock crock crock
Not even an ellipse, can you do
The oval is the conic cut
but you are so dumb and stupid too
Your entire head is up your loo loo lu

Moroney, so dumb in physics evermore
the kook thinks electron is .5MeV, or so
the gook thinks proton is 938MeV, mass
why does he keep his head up his ass
For the real proton is 840MeV rest mass

The real electron is the muon wouldn't you know
And it is 105 MeV rest mass, hello hello
Moroney, still with his head up his ass
The .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole
Yes, at last, .5MeV rest mass
But there is Moroney, still, with head up his ass
Stalk, stalk,stalk, worthless Moroney crock crock

Then there is the negative numbers foolery
Which the Moroney is a subscribed buffoonery
Touting negative here, negative there
Yet no negative number exists anywhere.

Then there is the way the Sun and stars shine
Moroney has his head in grime
The oaf thinks the stars and Sun shine from fusion
When in truth, they shine electromagnetic no confusion
Faraday law, but the Moroney is a failure bent on crime

Yes the Sun and stars shine from Faraday law
Inside each and every atom of a star
Muon thrusting through proton
The Faraday law produces magnetic monopoles
Not by fusion does a star shine, but by monopoles
Believers in fusion have their head full of holes

Moroney thinks Boole logic is great
With its 5 OR 3 equalling 8
Even a village idiot knows 5 AND 3 is 8
What can you expect from Moroney borne
A pinhead brain and a day late

Moroney, Christensen, Burse cabal
Model their minds after the Boole pitfall
They love contradiction of Either..Or..Or..Both
Is that why they are all three such a screwball
But the true story of Boole needs be told after-all

The story of Boole needs be told
For western civilization logic was sold
Boole went to school in a downpour rain
Not carrying a umbrella and not changing clothes
Taught his class in a freezing shivering cold

Of course the students were all laughing at this Boole clown
From whence Boole caught pneumonia and frowned
You would think Boole had a logical mind
But no, he insisted his wife make him more cold
By cold bathes and wet the bed in cold drown

Of course Boole would not pneumonia survive
But his foolish logic of 3 OR 2 equals five , thrives
Would carry on and fill books for Education
Parasites like Christensen, Burse, Moroney,
Jan Bielawski, Eastside to teach phony lies.

Shame that Western Civilization bases its logic on pinheads
Instead of sound reasoning, but what can be said
Is that education in schools these days is more concerned
About money flow of textbooks teaching fakery that it be
Then about the real truth of the world where 2 AND 1 is 3

SAGA II

Then these stalking education parasites of Moroney galore
As if parents paying $50,000 dollars a year in tuition and more
To schools like ETH, MIT, Harvard, Stanford admission
For their kids to be brainwashed that calculus is addition
Of rectangles of zero width, for zero multiply is zero
1 OR 1 equals 2 all so that parasites of math get their textbook
Cash of the profits along with professors, who cares about
Truth of math or science as long as money flows to parasitoids
Flows to Parasitoids

Parasitoids infesting education so much that it be
Of course that is where much of money is found easily
Where there is money there are parasites, for sure
We can easily see and the truth of Climate Change
And math and physics textbooks are mangled and deranged

For parasites of education are money grubs of highest degree
Just as the textbooks of math and physics authored by grubs
Are so expensive and never free
And our students and kids brainwashed by these grubs
So math and physics professors can live rich and free
And never worrying nor needing to fix their mistakes
And errors for that takes time away Mediterranean vacation Sea

So why fix mistakes and errors in physics and math
Asks Wiles, Conway, Tao, Singh, Hales, Stillwell
from a Med vacation Sea bath
For fixing math mistakes and errors, crimps the flow of cash
When we all would like to take another Med vacation Sea bath
For we like the steaks, champagne, chocolate cherries alas
And leave the trash of fixing errors to students, and AP to bash

Then again the trigonometry of sine wave needs mending
But Stillwell, Tao, Conway, Wiles, Ribet, Hales back on Greek isle cocktail blending
Sine was never a sinusoid wave, but rather a semicircle wave
For Stillwell,Tao,Conway, Wiles,Ribet,Hales refuse to fix sine
So long as they get their money flow suits them just fine

The matter of the sine wave being truly a semicircle wave
Not a sinusoid wave caught the attention of Conway in rave
And so did Conway admit the sine was truly a semicircle wave
Surreal he measured the money flow in fixing that math error
And like his Game of Life, decided another Med cruise is fairer
And that fixing errors and mistakes,is too much strife, in the Game of Life

The American Mathematical Society, AMS, what is their creed?
What is there philosophy and creed we must askk, or are they smoking weed
For certainly, fixing errors and mistakes in math is not on their agenda at all
So is it money that moves the AMS, big or small
Money and only money seems what the AMS is all about
Because, well they can never even admit the ellipse was never a conic, without a doubt.

And ask any of those of AMS, or Fields or Abel persons
Why they never bothered with a proof of Fundamental Theorem
Of Calculus as a geometry proof?
Was it too hard or they too dumb to do a geometry proof thereof
And why hand out more prizes left and right
When no prizewinner can ever fix the errors and mistakes strewn before
Are you in math all dumb and stupid as the rug on the floor?

Why do you scold your students when they make math mistakes?
You lower their grade and make them stay late
You penalize and exercise students who make mistakes
Yet you math professors never fix your own errors and mistakes
You ignore, ellipse is no conic, Calculus needs a geometry proof,
Sine is a semicircle wave not sinusoid, Either..Or..Or..Both is embraced by stupid math professors, oops, late for that coffee and Danish

Now once was Wiles with a FLT proof offered
But so dumb is Wiles in FLT he could not detect the mistake of Euler
For Euler proffered FLT in exponent three
But Euler forgot he had to prove the case of all three evens
Euler just proved one case of two odds, one even
But then Wiles desired fame and fortune not truth of math
So Wiles ends up littering the world with another mindnumbing trash

The story of FLT keeps going on, for another play was Beal
He pondered about Generalized FLT, and did the math spiel
He figured if he offered a prize for its proof and rigged it so lean
So he never had to pay-out, for AP proved his conjecture in 2014
Then he would have free publicity for life
As a stunt and would run all the way to the bank laughing like a wild teen
Even though Andrew Beal and AMS custody, none of them could tell
the difference between an ellipse and a oval, nor FLT

Now the AMS and US colleges are bad in math education, so very bad
That their classrooms are more like note taking factories, very sad
Where students learn not a shred of math in class
And have to rely on a shoddy textbook that is filled to the gills in symbols trash
Chickenscratching hieroglyphics terminology never designed to teach math
And professors never required to take "how to teach" courses, and test curves
Means not much learning going on, students dropping out of math, and better off going to a Med Sea bath

AP

Math Failure

AP writes: Moroney round the clock stalking

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-05 21:23:17 UTC

Alzheimer

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-10 21:22:02 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Moroney says--"Autistic & Alzheimer" //Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak,MIT, UNABLE TO CONFIRM AP's Real Proton = 840 MeV with electron= muon and .5MeV was Dirac magnetic monopole

Post by Michael Moroney
Alzheimer
Alzheimer

Path: t131ni2957wmt.0!nntp.google.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail

Post by Michael Moroney
Don't accuse "us" of your own misunderstanding. You must be the only
person in the world to dream up the cockamamie idea

Michael Artin, Martin Bazant, Bonnie Berger is Moroney giving away supersonic missile tech of MIT to Russia?? Too stupid to learn proton is 840MeV, real electron was 105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

AP writes: Reason I ask if kibo Moroney is a traitor and agent of Russia is because he has stu.neva.ru in his address. And likely MIT and CMU are working on missile technology

Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT vs. Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

CMU versus MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs Harvard physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, MIT physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

The world no longer needs physics professors who cannot understand Angular Momentum and that the Chemical bond cannot exist with proton = 938MeV, electron= .5MeV. The true proton is 840MeV, true electron= muon = 105MeV and the little particle of .5MeV that JJ Thomson discovered is actually Dirac's magnetic monopole.

Post by Michael Moroney
Math Failure

Post by Michael Moroney
Was he too much of a failure way
back then as well?

Post by Michael Moroney
Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Carnegie Mellon Univ. math dept
Jeremy Avigad, Steve Awodey, Egon Balas, Manuel Blum, Tom Bohman, Boris Bukh, Clinton Conley, Gerard P. Cornuejols, James Cummings, Irene Fonseca, Florian Frick, Alan Frieze, Rami Grossberg, Yu Gu, William J. Hrusa, Gautam Iyer, David Kinderlehrer, Dmitry Kramkov, John P. Lehoczky, Giovanni Leoni, Po-Shen Loh, Johannes Muhle-Karbe, Wesley Pegden, Robert Pego, Javier Pena, Agoston Pisztora, Hayden Schaeffer, Jack Schaeffer, Ernest Schimmerling, Steven E. Shreve, Dejan Slepcev, Richard Statman, Shlomo Ta'asan, Ian Tice, Tomasz Tkocz, Noel J. Walkington, Franziska Weber

president cmu: Farnum Jahanian, computer science

MIT math dept.

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

President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

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

LIST of Failed Physicists because they still believe electron is .5MeV, in no order, and so very stupid are they in physics, for they could not even understand the physics of winter versus summer

Peter Higgs
- show quoted text -
William Alfred Fowler
Kenneth G. Wilson
James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch
Sheldon Lee Glashow
Steven Weinberg
.
.
little fishes
.
.
layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = 1 while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV

Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
more and more layers of error thinking physics
.
.
John Baez
Brian Greene
Lisa Randall
Alan H. Guth
Michael E. Brown
Konstantin Batygin
Ben Bullock
Larry Harson
Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
None at all - he was a raving nutter.
Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
Edward Witten

Yes, what did they say-- the power of Sun and stars is not really fusion but is the Faraday Law inside of atoms creating monopoles and turning Space into energy that fuels the Sun and stars. My rough estimate is that fusion only supplies 10% or less of Sun and stars.

But of course, I could not have discovered the true starpower when under the silly idea that the electron was a mere .5MeV when it truly is 105 MeV.

In that manner, physics departments are racist physicists for the knowledge that Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840 MeV, and the .5MeV was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole is going on 2 years now in the public eye starting 2017, yet none of these physicists (these poor physicists lacking understanding of angular momentum has raised a single peep). The reason they keep their mouths shut, is because they are so poor in physics, they do not want to be embarrassed. These gentlemen and ladies are not physicists, for a real physicist would debate the issue, not hide from the issue. And real physicist would not discount a discovery because of the person-- Archimedes Plutonium who discovered it.

- hide quoted text -
Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-11 02:39:02 UTC

Alzheimer

Lee Grodzins , Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, MIT, are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is 840MeV, real electron was 105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole in order to have chemistry bonding

Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT vs. Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

CMU versus MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs Harvard physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, MIT physicists are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

The world no longer needs physics professors who cannot understand Angular Momentum and that the Chemical bond cannot exist with proton = 938MeV, electron= .5MeV. The true proton is 840MeV, true electron= muon = 105MeV and the little particle of .5MeV that JJ Thomson discovered is actually Dirac's magnetic monopole.

Math Failure

Path: a204ni9727wmh.0!nntp.google.com!goblin3!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ***@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
From: ***@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the loud mouth idiot hatemonger nonstop, stalker. I post under the name Moroney or kibo or dozens of other fake names for hatred is my game, not science. I love it when Usenet was created because I was a bully but did not want to be pommeled into the ground for spitting hatred on people and Usenet allows me to spit hatred 24 hours 360 days. I am a hate monger who hates people and hates science-- for I am a worthless shithead of a living being-Moroney. As kibo Moroney shein, I want to teach new kids on the block how to pester, harass, authors, just as I have done for 26 years-- the new kids of Dan Christensen, Jan Burse (if not in prison), Zelos Malum, qwbr, Jan Bielawski, Erik Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, Franz, teach them how to be a shithead just like me.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

Moroney math failure, here is where the fool thinks 938 is short of 945 by 12%, and he pretends he is an electrical engineer. Perhaps the first e.e. in the world that cannot do a percentage correctly

Carnegie Mellon Univ. math dept
Jeremy Avigad, Steve Awodey, Egon Balas, Manuel Blum, Tom Bohman, Boris Bukh, Clinton Conley, Gerard P. Cornuejols, James Cummings, Irene Fonseca, Florian Frick, Alan Frieze, Rami Grossberg, Yu Gu, William J. Hrusa, Gautam Iyer, David Kinderlehrer, Dmitry Kramkov, John P. Lehoczky, Giovanni Leoni, Po-Shen Loh, Johannes Muhle-Karbe, Wesley Pegden, Robert Pego, Javier Pena, Agoston Pisztora, Hayden Schaeffer, Jack Schaeffer, Ernest Schimmerling, Steven E. Shreve, Dejan Slepcev, Richard Statman, Shlomo Ta'asan, Ian Tice, Tomasz Tkocz, Noel J. Walkington, Franziska Weber

president cmu: Farnum Jahanian, computer science

MIT math dept.

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

President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

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

LIST of Failed Physicists because they still believe electron is .5MeV, in no order, and so very stupid are they in physics, for they could not even understand the physics of angular momentum of two particles 938 to .5 rather than 840 to 105 MeV

Peter Higgs
Rainer Weiss
Kip S. Thorne
Barry C. Barish
David J. Thouless
F. Duncan M. Haldane
John M. Kosterlitz
Takaaki Kajita
Arthur B. McDonald
Francois Englert
Saul Perlmutter
Brian P. Schmidt
Adam G. Riess
Makoto Kobayashi
Toshihide Maskawa
Yoichiro Nambu
John C. Mather
George F. Smoot
Roy J. Glauber
David J. Gross
Hugh David Politzer
Frank Wilczek
Raymond Davis Jr.
Masatoshi Koshiba
Riccardo Giacconi
Gerardus 't Hooft
Martinus J.G. Veltman
Jerome I. Friedman
Henry W. Kendall
Richard E. Taylor
Carlo Rubbia
Simon van der Meer
William Alfred Fowler
Kenneth G. Wilson
James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch
Sheldon Lee Glashow
Steven Weinberg
.
.
little fishes
.
.
layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = 1 while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV

Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
more and more layers of error thinking physics
.
.
John Baez
Brian Greene
Lisa Randall
Alan H. Guth
Michael E. Brown
Konstantin Batygin
Ben Bullock
Larry Harson
Mark Barton, PhD in Physics, The University of Queensland, physicist with National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
Answered Aug 26, 2013 · Author has 8.7k answers and 10.3m answer views
None at all - he was a raving nutter.
Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
Edward Witten

Yes, what did they say-- the power of Sun and stars is not really fusion but is the Faraday Law inside of atoms creating monopoles and turning Space into energy that fuels the Sun and stars. My rough estimate is that fusion only supplies 10% or less of Sun and stars.

But of course, I could not have discovered the true starpower when under the silly idea that the electron was a mere .5MeV when it truly is 105 MeV.

In that manner, physics departments are racist physicists for the knowledge that Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840 MeV, and the .5MeV was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole is going on 2 years now in the public eye starting 2017, yet none of these physicists (these poor physicists lacking understanding of angular momentum has raised a single peep). The reason they keep their mouths shut, is because they are so poor in physics, they do not want to be embarrassed. These gentlemen and ladies are not physicists, for a real physicist would debate the issue, not hide from the issue. And real physicist would not discount a discovery because of the person-- Archimedes Plutonium who discovered it.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-16 23:48:57 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
[X] ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
[ ] ...who are university math or physics professors...
[ ] ...at a university supposedly near

AP writes: no no no, kibo or kibosh moroney, we want to know if Harvard is going to ever acknowledge the real electron is the muon and the proton is 840 MeV and the little particle of .5MeV was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. But you are so stupid in all of science, for you still think 938 is short of 945 by 12%. You must be terrible at a bank loan

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-21 20:28:32 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Alzheimer

AP writes: no I do not think Drs. Summers, Glashow, Randall have either autism or Alzheimers, but a good check would be to see if they can understand a ellipse was never a conic

Proofs ellipse is never a conic, always a cylinder section by
Archimedes Plutonium
--------------------
AP's proof the ellipse is never a Conic Section, always a Cylinder section, and how the proof works

Let us analyze AP's Proof

On Friday, September 14, 2018 at 6:57:36 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Array:: Analytic Geometry proof that Cylinder section= Ellipse//Conic
section = Oval, never ellipse

Now I did 3 Experiments and 3 models of the problem, but it turns out
that one model is superior over all the other models. One model is the
best of all.

That model is where you construct a cone and a cylinder and then
implant a circle inside the cone and cylinder attached to a handle so
that you can rotate the circle inside. Mine uses a long nail that I
poked holes into the side of a cylinder and another one inside a cone
made from heavy wax paper of magazine covers. And I used a Mason or
Kerr used lid and I attached them to the nail by drilling two holes
into each lid and running a wire as fastener. All of this done so I
can rotate or pivot the circle inside the cylinder and cone. You need
a long nail, for if you make the models too small or too skinny, you
lose clarity.

ARRAY, Analytic Geometry Proof, Cylinder Section is a Ellipse::

E
__
.-' `-.
.' `.
/ \
; ;
| G c | H
; ;
\ /
`. .'
`-. _____ .-'
F

Alright, focus on the distance from c to F in the cone-cut compared to the distance from c to E

In a Cylinder cut, those two distances are the same because a cylinder has two axes of symmetry.

The side view of a cylinder is this

| |
| |
| |

That allows cE to be the same distance as cF

But the side view of the cone is

/\E
/c \
F / \

The distance c to E is shorter because the slant of the side walls of the cone are in the direction of shortening cE, whereas the slant opposite c in cF make that distance larger than cE

The above is a view of a ellipse with center c and is produced by the
Sectioning of a Cylinder as long as the cut is not perpendicular to
the base, and as long as the cut involves two points not larger than
the height of the cylinder walls. What we want to prove is that the
cut is always a ellipse, which is a plane figure of two axes of
symmetry with a Major Axis and Minor Axis and center at c.

Side view of Cylinder EGFH above with entry point cut at E and exit
point cut at F and where c denotes the central axis of the cylinder
and where x denotes a circle at c parallel with the base-circle of
cylinder

| |
| | E
| |
| |
|x c |x
| |
| |
| |
|F |
| |
| |
| |

So we can see that the distance cE = cF in cylinder for the walls are Parallel to one another, giving distance symmetry

But in the Cone, the walls are not parallel, shortening the distance cE compared to cF. Leaving only one axis of symmetry that of EF. The oval is the conic section of a cut at a slant, while the cylinder cut at a slant is a ellipse. The Oval has just one axis of symmetry.

So, what is the proof that figure EGFH is always an ellipse in the
cylinder section? The line segment GH is the diameter of the circle
base of cylinder and the cylinder axis cuts this diameter in half such
that Gc = cH. Now we only need to show that Fc = cE. This is done from
the right triangles cxF and cxE, for we note that by Angle-Side-Angle
these two right triangles are congruent and hence Fc = cE, our second
axis of symmetry and thus figure EGFH is always an ellipse. QED

Array proof:: Analytic Geometry proof that Conic section= Oval// never ellipse

ARRAY, Analytic Geometry Proof, Conic Section is a Oval, never an ellipse::

A
,'" "`.
/ \
C | c | D
\ /
` . ___ .'
B

The above is a view of a figure formed from the cut of a conic with
center c as the axis of the cone and is produced by the Sectioning of
a Cone as long as the cut is not perpendicular to the base, and as
long as the cut is not a hyperbola, parabola or circle (nor line).
What we want to prove is that this cut is always a oval, never an
ellipse. An oval is defined as a plane figure of just one axis of
symmetry and possessing a center, c, with a Major Diameter as the axis
of symmetry and a Minor Diameter. In our diagram above, the major
diameter is AB and minor diameter is CD.

Alright, almost the same as with Cylinder section where we proved the
center was half way between Major Axis and Minor Axis of cylinder,
only in the case of the Conic, we find that the center is half way
between CD the Minor Diameter, but the center is not halfway in
between the Major Diameter, and all of that because of the reason the
slanted walls of the cone cause the distance cA to be far smaller than
the distance cB. In the diagram below we have the circle of x centered
at c and parallel to base. The angle at cx is not 90 degrees as in
cylinder. The angle of cAx is not the same as the angle cBx, as in the
case of the cylinder, because the walls of the cone-for line segments-
are slanted versus parallel in the cylinder. Triangles cAx and cBx are
not congruent, and thus, the distance of cA is not equal to cB,
leaving only one axis of symmetry AB, not CD.

/ \A
x/ c \x
B/ \

Hence, every cut in the Cone, not a hyperbola, not a parabola, not a
circle (not a line) is a Oval, never an ellipse.

QED

--Archimedes Plutonium

AP
Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-31 19:36:55 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Math Failure

AP writes: Moroney-kibo-shein spammers for decades, never any math never any physics-- just insane stalking

Michael Moroney

2019-03-31 21:20:39 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: Moroney-kibo-shein spammers for decades, never any math never any physics-- just insane stalking

Archimedes Plutonium, spammer for decades, never any math never any physics-- just
insane stalking.

x-no-archive: yes
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole

Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com> writes:

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-10 13:54:06 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

sci.physics & sci.math are dead newsgroups due in large part to stalkers such as kibo Parry Moroney// read my science research at https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe Archimedes Plutonium

Post by Michael Moroney
Mosquito of Math and Gnat of Physics

Post by Michael Moroney
Alzheimer
Autistic

stalker kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

stalker kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
Autistic
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

stalker kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
Mouse of Math and Phlea of Physics

Flaming Psychotic Embolism

2019-07-10 14:54:25 UTC

Shut up idiette.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-15 17:56:21 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

kibo Parry Moroney's opinion of Dr. Lisa Randall-- just because she fails to recognize ellipse is never a conic// see AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Minnow of Math and Phlea of Physics
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

Post by Michael Moroney
"We"? You still think

About spam and shitheads Dan Christensen and kibo Parry Moroney-- probably paid to stalk and when no stalking then fill the front page with spam manuals
Discussion
Fundamentals of Corporate Finance solution manual (1)
By tomato hello 1 post 0 views updated 6:23 PM
sci.physics & sci.math are dead newsgroups due in large part to stalkers such as kibo Parry Moroney & Dan Christensen// read my science research and posts in peace and quiet in plutonium-atom-universe
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium

Post by Michael Moroney
Mosquito of Math and Gnat of Physics
WARNING TO STUDENTS
Mosquito of Math and Gnat of Physics
Mosquito of Math and Gnat of Physics
Alzheimer
Autistic

stalker kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

stalker kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
Autistic
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

stalker kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
Mouse of Math and Phlea of Physics

Michael Moroney

2019-03-31 21:29:23 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: Moroney-kibo-shein spammers for decades, never any math never any physics-- just insane stalking

Archimedes Plutonium, spammer for decades, never any math never any physics-- just
insane stalking.

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-04-02 18:40:46 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Autistic

AP writes: the worthless stalker Moroney of 27 years, just repeats and repeats, the insane nutter.

No wonder Harvard wastes time in confirming true proton is 840MeV, not 938MeV

Michael Moroney

2019-04-02 19:18:50 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: the worthless stalker Moroney of 27 years, just repeats and repeats, the
insane nutter.

I can't help it if your autism makes you so repetive.
Why are you autistic people so repetive?

x-no-archive: yes

SergIo

2019-04-02 19:37:01 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: the worthless stalker Moroney of 27 years, just repeats and repeats, the
insane nutter.

I can't help it if your autism makes you so repetive.
Why are you autistic people so repetive?
x-no-archive: yes

south dakota is know for high levels of cosmic rays

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-04-21 03:23:34 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
You succumbed

Michael Moroney wrote:
10:06 PM (7 minutes ago)

Post by Michael Moroney
Subject: Re: kibo, Parry, Moroney, Shein favorite AP book this month-- AP's waterwheel history in Amazon's Kindle
History: Waterwheel crucial technology of Ancient Rome Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item
AP replies: I can see a Emerson art student like you favoring AP's waterwheel book above others.

MM: is offering to teach your children

AP replies: is this true Moroney, you are offering all 43 AP Kindle books paid for by you to Harvard? This indeed will enrich lavishly the Harvard science library. I especially like the Sabre Tooth Tiger book by AP where he mildly makes fun of the world's Paleontologists who fell for the gaffe that those teeth were the tigers when even the Boston village idiot would sense that those teeth belonged to some other animal like the Walrus. I think even Dr. Larry Summers although a economist would get a chuckle over the science error of the Smilodon.

Was the Saber-Toothed-Tiger, Smilodon, Paleontologists most laughable mistake? Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since I was a teenager in High School, I was troubled with the saber-toothed tiger-- how evolution could have built such an animal. But I was not logical in mind as a teenager, and had to wait until now to let my logical mind survey that perplexing question. To an extraordinary claim in science-- huge teeth that an animal cannot cope with, requires extra-special evidence and proofs of science. How can evolution theory (even though it is a rule or algorithm) (see my Superdeterminism replaces Darwin Evolution book), how can evolution produce an animal with teeth that "get in the way of everything" as the animal goes through life. So, I am asking the science community to completely re-examine the fossil evidence of Smilodon. I do not have that evidence available, but the entire Paleontology community can make the evidence available. For what I suspect is that the tiger never had saber-teeth and that those teeth found in digs or tar pits, were the teeth of Entelodonts or some ungulate horn or walrus type animal teeth. In other words, I question the claim there ever existed a cat with huge canine teeth.

Cover Picture: What spurred me onto this small book was a few days ago seeing the cover of Science News showing a Saber-Toothed Tiger. And how utterly ridiculous for a tiger to have those teeth. And just as ridiculous that grown scientists believe such nonsense without questioning it.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-04-25 01:41:47 UTC

Does Harvard pay the criminal stalker Moroney to attack 24-7-365?? A good read for him in prison is Stonethrowing Theory: how humans evolved from apes Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

AP writes: stalking is criminal behavior, especially when it has gone on for 27 years by Moroney. Also, what is criminal behavior is tearing down AP's wikipedia page site and forging AP's name to Math Stack Exchange. And the above is not one individual person but a group of criminals, for they operate 24 hours per day.

Stonethrowing Theory: how humans evolved from apes Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Anthropology as a science is summed up as how humans evolved from apes. Further, that process of evolution is summed up as the "behavior of rock or stone throwing". What turned ape into human was throwing rocks and stones for the advantage of more food, more mating, for protection and for offense. Stonethrowing requires better hands and muscles to throw, requires bipedalism, and requires a more evolved brain to think of how the rock is thrown and where it lands.
This book will imply that all species that ends up as an intelligent species underwent, or evolved
from a behavior of throwing rocks and stones. The pathway to intelligence and "doing science" all begins from the behavior of picking up rocks and stones and throwing them. You could say, the birth of a species that does science, all points back to a time in which they threw rocks and stones.

Cover picture: My hand holding a rock to throw. But that is not an ordinary rock, for I believe it is one of many meteorites I collected, not sure but guessing it is a meteorite.

Length: 427 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

File Size: 1826 KB
Print Length: 427 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQDM9VR
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Michael Moroney wrote:

6:58 PM (1 hour ago)
Re: Archimedes "Unofficial State Idiot of South Dakota" Plutonium flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

AutisticPlutonium <***@gmail.com> fails at math and science:

Michael Moroney wrote:

9:35 AM (2 hours ago)
Re: Archimedes "Unofficial State Idiot of South Dakota" Plutonium flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

AP writes: stalking is criminal behavior, especially when it has gone on for
27 years by the above.

So why do you continue to stalk

Michael Moroney wrote:

8:55 AM (3 hours ago)

Re: Archimedes "Unofficial State Idiot of South Dakota" Plutonium flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

Now in my soon to come out textbook volume 1 of Teaching True Mathematics, =
I do a proof that no Negative Numbers can exist.

WARNING TO PARENTS:

Michael Moroney wrote:

2:35 PM (1 hour ago)

Re: Archimedes "Village Idiot" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Subject: Re: Can we wrestle and finagle with the IF--> THEN some more ???Re: concordance of true Logic to mathematics algebra axioms
Alright, here we can question the possibility that we can finesse some more of the IF THEN connector. Does it necessarily have to be TFUU, or could we save the last entry where we have If F--> then F would be true.
Keep in mind we need only one value to obtain the undefined for math division by 0
Do we need both the last two rows be U ???
Well, if we substitute in 1 and 0 and we pretend the connecter is divide, we may get a surprise or two.
Yes, so, we confirmed by the above that you need two Undefined for the If Then connector.

"We" again, Archie? Do your diseased cats really "help" you with logic?
Is that why your "logic" is so illogical??

<snip>
The usual "12 Failures of Plutonium" + personal attack + stalking of
Harvard professors.
You succumbed to your autism again, I see. Better luck next time.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-04-26 04:09:37 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Math Failure

AP writes: no, I am sure everyone at Harvard can do percentages just fine. It is only you, Moroney, a criminal stalker that still thinks 938 is 12% short of 945. Go back to that dance and art school there-- Emerson College and leave sci.physics and sci.math alone, you criminal stalker

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-20 02:48:42 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Autistic

AP writes: Is Harvard physics like Moroney-- only doing ad hominem, never any physics like confirming real proton is 840MeV not 938

Michael Moroney

2019-05-20 03:58:59 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: Is Harvard physics like Moroney-- only doing ad hominem, never any physics

Is South Dakota like AutisticPlutonium-- only doing ad hominem, never any physics.

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-24 14:51:09 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Donald Schwendeman, Rensselaer Polytechnic,Joseph Ecker, William Henshaw, Isom Herron, James Parry (kibo), is the reason RPI failed ellipse is like Kibo fails with 938 is 12% short of 945

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Physics dept
Vincent Meunier, Ethan Brown, Glenn Ciolek, Julian S. Georg, Joel T. Giedt, Yong Sung Kim, Gyorgy Korniss, Toh-Ming Lu, Charles Martin, Joseph Darryl Michael, Heidi Jo Newberg, Moussa N'Gom, Peter Persans, John Schroeder, Michael Shur, Shawn-Yu Lin, Humberto Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang, Morris A Washington, Esther A. Wertz, Christian M. Wetzel, Ingrid Wilke, Shengbai Zhang

Rensselaer math department
Donald Schwendeman, Jeffrey Banks, Kristin Bennett, Mohamed Boudjelkha, Joseph Ecker, William Henshaw, Isom Herron, Mark H Holmes, David Isaacson, Elizabeth Kam, Ashwani Kapila, Maya Kiehl, Gregor Kovacic, Peter Kramer, Gina Kucinski, Rongjie Lai, Fengyan Li, Chjan Lim, Yuri V Lvov, Harry McLaughlin, John E. Mitchell, Bruce Piper, David A Schmidt, Daniel Stevenson, Yangyang Xu, Bulent Yener, Donald Drew, William Siegmann

James Parry grew up and lived in Scotia, New York. He showed early computing skills, such as being able to open up and reprogram ROM video game cartridges such as those for the Atari 2600, but was more interested in graphics and artistic pursuits. In this vein, he was initially a computer engineering major at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) in Troy, New York, but moved to Boston, Massachusetts in 1990 and attended Emerson College, where he studied videography and graphic design. At that time, he also worked as a typeface designer and for the world.std.com internet service provider. He developed several fonts in use today. One of his better-known works is the typography for Philip K. Dick's novel Gather Yourselves Together.[6]
Click here to Reply

Question RPI-- did you dismiss James Parry from RPI because he is a incurable stalker-- 27 years stalking AP. And Parry knows no math nor physics as shown by his recent gaffe--

Moroney math failure, here is where the fool thinks 938 is short of 945 by 12%, and he pretends he is an electrical engineer. Perhaps the first e.e. in the world that cannot do a percentage correctly

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

Post by Michael Moroney
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass

> of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Question Rensselaer-- is the reason you keep teaching the ellipse is a conic even when AP proved it was the oval of a slant cut into the cone (see AP's proof below). Is the reason you keep teaching the ellipse is a conic because all the professors at Rensselaer have a "joke mind when it comes to science, a joke like Parry is just a joke in science and a failure in science".

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am James kibo Parry, for i know no science, no math, no physics but my game is to stalk and demonize other people on the internet. I do this demonizing because it elicits some laughs from other low lifes like myself.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

True Chemistry Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.

Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2

Read less

Length: 1097 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $2.99 What's this?

File Size: 1948 KB
Print Length: 1097 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLVMMSZ
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,150,073 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#960 in General Chemistry & Reference
#7113 in Physics (Kindle Store)
#7705 in General Chemistry

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS (textbook in the making-- journal textbook): journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 328 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1968 KB
Print Length: 328 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
 

AP's periodic journal of fakeries in science: Magazine of science and math fakes foisted on general public Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The world is tired of "peer reviewed science" masquerading as the truth of science, when it is often the case that peer reviewed is false and fake science, even anti-science, as entrenched pork barrel money machines that look more towards "money money money". Or the peer review of magazines and journals that also look more towards "money" as a promotion ladder for unscrupulous professors climbing a promotion ladder at the school they teach. Publish, publish, publish, but seldom truth truth truth.

April 2019 issue-- discusses black holes as pure science fiction fakeries for a world that has a Pauli Exclusion Principle PEP, is a world that cannot simultaneously have a black hole. Physicists just never learned any logic to know that science cannot hold a contradiction. All science laws breakdown the minute you accept contradictions. Either the world has PEP but no black holes, or, the world has both, still a contradiction. Cover picture is HD98800 which is two binary star pairs and looks better as a black hole than does the fake recent black hole photo.

May issue --discusses the unwillingness of scientists and mathematicians to accept true science such as the ellipse is never a conic even when given a High School proof the ellipse is not a conic. And psychology is discussed as to "hate-envy-motivation" of scientists that blocks their minds from accepting the truth of science.

June issue of 2019-- discusses why and what the fake "gravity waves" reports from LIGO; what those reports really mean and measure.

July issue-- as yet to be decided, for the world of fake science is a long list to chose from..

Editor in chief of this magazine journal, AP

File Size: 1755 KB
Print Length: 27 pages
Publication Date: April 28, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07R5Q2199
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-25 21:25:52 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Such a gang of worthless failures of science,-- stalkers, James kibo Parry-Moroney,Dan Christensen, Zelos Malum, qbwr, Jan Bielawski, Franz, Michael Moroney, Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, who gang up and attack posters 24-7-365. And have destroyed the newsgroups sci.physics, sci.math to the point their only function can be as a poster announcement with no chance of idea development in such a corrosive environment of marauding imps. Sad sad state of affairs that the Internet allows such a moron creep of James kibo Parry lord over sci.math and sci.physics, much like letting a 3 year old be a lifeguard at a swimming pool.

Both sci.physics and sci.math are overrun by attacking stalkers, stalkers in gangs, and the spam is probably generated from this same gang of stalkers as a technique to pushing posters they attack off the front page. Several of these gang members work for a small ISP company who have nothing better to do than gang up and attack, usually at night. Both sci.physics and sci.math have ceased being a platform to do any science, other than as a poster board. No-one can do any "normal science" in that environment, no-one can develop ideas in that environment. And the pay-off of getting an insight in science versus the time wasted on fighting the gang of jerks is not worth it. The only useful function for sci.math and sci.physics is announcement, and let the worthless jerks dance around the announcements.

To read what AP is currently doing-- Real Science-- you have to go to ---

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Very crude dot picture of 5f6 magnetosphere of 231Pu Atom Totality

A torus shape doing the Faraday Law inside of each and every atom.
   __
.-' `-.
.' ::\ ::|:: /:: `.
/ ::\::|::/:: \    inside the atom is rings of Faraday Law coil and bar magnet
;..........  _ _ ............ ;
|.......... ( ).............|
; - -    ;
\ ::/::|::\::    / neutrons form a atom-skin cover over the torus rings
   `. ::/ ::|:: \:: .'
   `- _____ .-'

One of those dots in the magnetosphere is the Milky Way galaxy. And
each dot represents another galaxy. The O is the Cosmic nucleus and
certainly not as dense as what Old Physics thought, and perhaps it is a void altogether
because in New Physics the interior of atoms has the Faraday law going on.

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Atom Totality Universe Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

Physics book that explains what the universe is, and how it works. This is a continuation of the Atomic Theory by Democritus in Ancient Greek times. It adds one more fact to the Atomic Theory. That the Universe itself is one gigantic big atom. It completes the logic of science that Dr. Feynman wrote-- all things are made up of atoms -- and so, to complete that idea -- all things and the universe itself is an atom.

Length: 616 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

File Size: 632 KB
Print Length: 616 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLP9NDR
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,903,481 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#6115 in Physics (Kindle Store)
#38566 in Physics (Books)
#74700 in Biological Sciences (Books)

True Chemistry Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.

Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2

Read less

Length: 1097 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $2.99 What's this?

File Size: 1948 KB
Print Length: 1097 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLVMMSZ
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,150,073 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#960 in General Chemistry & Reference
#7113 in Physics (Kindle Store)
#7705 in General Chemistry

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS (textbook in the making-- journal textbook): journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 328 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1968 KB
Print Length: 328 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

AP's periodic journal of fakeries in science: Magazine of science and math fakes foisted on general public Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The world is tired of "peer reviewed science" masquerading as the truth of science, when it is often the case that peer reviewed is false and fake science, even anti-science, as entrenched pork barrel money machines that look more towards "money money money". Or the peer review of magazines and journals that also look more towards "money" as a promotion ladder for unscrupulous professors climbing a promotion ladder at the school they teach. Publish, publish, publish, but seldom truth truth truth.

April 2019 issue-- discusses black holes as pure science fiction fakeries for a world that has a Pauli Exclusion Principle PEP, is a world that cannot simultaneously have a black hole. Physicists just never learned any logic to know that science cannot hold a contradiction. All science laws breakdown the minute you accept contradictions. Either the world has PEP but no black holes, or, the world has both, still a contradiction. Cover picture is HD98800 which is two binary star pairs and looks better as a black hole than does the fake recent black hole photo.

May issue --discusses the unwillingness of scientists and mathematicians to accept true science such as the ellipse is never a conic even when given a High School proof the ellipse is not a conic. And psychology is discussed as to "hate-envy-motivation" of scientists that blocks their minds from accepting the truth of science.

June issue of 2019-- discusses why and what the fake "gravity waves" reports from LIGO; what those reports really mean and measure.

July issue-- as yet to be decided, for the world of fake science is a long list to chose from..

Editor in chief of this magazine journal, AP

File Size: 1755 KB
Print Length: 27 pages
Publication Date: April 28, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07R5Q2199
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
• Be the first to review this item
•
•
•
•
•
• See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Read less

Length: 14 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $0.99 What's this?

File Size: 1629 KB
Print Length: 14 pages
Publication Date: April 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QRPZQ4Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

 Would you like to tell us about a lower price?

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $4.00 to buy

Real proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof

Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019 I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.

As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).

Length: 74 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1445 KB
Print Length: 74 pages
Publication Date: March 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQKGW4M
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-27 04:24:04 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

kibo Parry Moroney-- never any contributions to sci.math or sci.physics-- only demonization and character bashing-- time for the asylum for kibo

ANALBUTTFUCKMANURE stalker Archimedes Plutonium Corner,, stalker for 24 years
15 posts by 2 authors

1/21/18

Michael Moroney I've held off on this abuse so far, but it appears that sociopathic Archimedes Plutonium just can't learn to behave in society. His mommy really never did teach him manners. So we can discuss Archimedes Plutonium's abuse and stalking here.

1/21/18

Michael Moroney First example of Archie's abuse. Can't take any criticism, so he posts this. And Archie, you really need to stop insulting your superiors! Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com> writes: >On Friday, January 19, 2018 at 2:32:42 AM UTC-6,

1/23/18

Michael Moroney ***@gmail.com writes: >======================================== >why don t you sat cut short >archI -Napoleon Bonparte >is a PSYCHOPATH !!! >== >Y.P >======================= He's obviously mentally ill, but I don't think he qualifies as

1/23/18

Michael Moroney So Archie, can you actually answer this, rather than just reposting it in attack posts? Failure Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com> reposts: Michael Moroney writes Jan 21 (10 minutes ago) Archie, you always complain

1/25/18

Michael Moroney And once again, I am correct. Archie cannot respond sanely to a comment, he always autistically posts a canned message unrelated to the comment, either the one with the "12 Failures of Plutonium" and insulting & stalking uninvolved professors, or

1/26/18

Michael Moroney >HE IS A ***PSYCHOPATH !!!** >are you afraid to say it??!! >Y.Porat >============================== Definitely mentally ill, but not a psychopath, I don't think. I've been watching his antics for about 24 years, and at the same time got a

1/28/18

Michael Moroney Archimedes "just wasn't bolted down too tight in the first place" Plutonium tarded: Exciting news, Plutonium's new board game-- >How does one win and how do you pronounce that word >ANALBUTTFUCKMANURE Looks like Archie Plutonium is trying to

1/28/18

Michael Moroney Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com> writes: >Porat asks a question on product review:: whether he can get the board >game from internet mail order So now Archie is trying to get Porat to play Archie's new game "Analbuttfuckmanure"

1/31/18

Michael Moroney So why this continued abuse? It appears Archie has three levels of anger,

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-27 19:35:15 UTC

Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 11:50:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: kibo-Parry Moroney, Dan Christensen, Zelos Malum, qbwr, Jan
Bielawski, Franz, Michael Moroney, Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, the gang
of 12 killed off sci.math sci.physics
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 18:50:10 +0000

Shithead Hunter in sci.math and sci.physics hunting shitheads like --kibo-Parry Moroney, Dan Christensen,Jan Burse, Zelos Malum, qbwr, Jan Bielawski, Franz, Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, the gang of 12 killed off sci.math sci.physics

Now I left off this math poem in my book Science of Poetry, and since sci.math and sci.physics are dead newsgroups due to the fact they are overrun by crazed lunatics that need be in an asylum for all they do is pester and harass any poster who is really doing science and chase them out. Franz, one of those attackers says it is a gang of 12 angry Gay men who we can thus assume that Dan Christensen and kibo Parry Moroney are the gang leaders and has thus caused the death of sci.math and sci.physics. I for one lasted until May of 2019 where finally being hounded by Erik Eastside to have to delete and repost my posts for about a full week, decided that it is time to be the Hunter, the Predator instead of the victim that I was for 27 years. So now, this gang of 12, I am going to give them the taste of their own medicine, kick the shit out of them so to speak. Let them see, feel and understand that they are worthless crazed insane jerks and feel what they dished out for 27 years. They deserve it, because they destroyed sci.math and sci.physics to the point where, I could no longer even stomach it. But, now, I did actually gain a valuable going away present, or gift, before I became the Hunter, no longer the prey. And the point and reason for my posting to sci.math and sci.physics-- because you can learn and retrieve something of value, but now, you cannot, no longer. So, time to Hunt and make these jerks be victims.

I must admit that the robot troll of Mitch Raem-- whatever, in a series of threads I posted about Dr. Hau, that Mitch made a post and included a phrase of -- "shut off the light" or words to that effect. And that started a major discovery on my part of Physics quantum entanglement. So the robot Mitch, in words in passing led me to one of my major discoveries. So, even though sci.math and sci.physics are flooded with cesspool shitheads like kibo Parry Moroney, Christensen, Eastside, Franz, Burse, Bielawski, mindless cesspool shitheads that have destroyed sci.math and sci.physics, even with all that dark and ugly mess, a beautiful new idea can still emerge with the laser light turned off by Dr. Hau in her Harvard "slow light" experiments.

But now, I lose too much time in battling the shitheads and it takes too much of my time so that I can no longer afford to do Normal Science in sci.math or sci.physics but only to make ANNOUNCEMENTS in these two dead as a husk shell of newsgroups, run by worthless asylum shitheads of kibo Parry Moroney Christensen Burse.

Shitheads force me to not do Normal science here in sci.math or sci.physics any longer but to become an Announcer and Hunter of shitheads.

In this manner, I can easily spend time on doing Poetry of Science which has become a sort of hobby of mine. I cannot do good poetry, for really, my mind is such that it is mostly all centered on Hard Cold Physics Understanding, somewhat far too far away from warm cozy laughable poetry.

I left off with the below stanza and now have plenty of time to build up on that stanza, in my Hunter's role of sci.math and sci.physics, to keep those two newsgroups from otherwise vanishing completely by shitheads. Shame that sci.math and sci.physics ends up being just poetry, when it could have ended up being a diamond beacon.

Science of Poetry Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy  

Length: 34 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Pa

Since the entire Universe is just one big atom of Plutonium with Superdeterminism, means every action, even poetry is physics.
So, what is the goal, aim, purpose of poems and poetry? This book delves into the question.

Carbon in us, carbon of plutonium
Fill us with life anew

File Size: 1838 KB
Print Length: 34 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: May 13, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RPVWRRB
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

Continuing from the below quoted stanza:

played to by a light reggae or rapp beat music---

Now the AMS and US colleges are bad in math education, so very bad
That their classrooms are more like note taking factories, very sad
Where students learn not a shred of math in class
And have to rely on a shoddy textbook that is filled to the gills in symbols trash
Chicken-scratching hieroglyphics terminology never designed to teach math
And professors never required to take "how to teach" courses, and test curves
Means not much learning going on, students dropping out of math,
And better off, going to a Med Sea bath

Yes, colleges and universities across the world, their math classes
Just note taking robotic factories
Students not human but robotic manipulations
As they are forced to take mindless notes all during class
Not learning one single thing in class
And the book of no help either
Leads only to major nightmares of an impending test
For the teachers of math of these classes, too dumb to see that
no-one is learning a shred of math in those note-taking classes

You think the math professor would be smart enough to see that no learning is going on in his her class
But no, a distance of a few meters and the professor just is too dumb to recognize
No learning is going on, because the professor does not know how to teach
Nor makes any effort in doing real teaching, but rather is thinking of the nice next
Mediteranean Sea Bath

The gang of sci.math and sci.physics shitheads
kibo-Parry Moroney, Dan Christensen, Zelos Malum,
qbwr, Jan Bielawski, Franz, Michael Moroney, Eastside,
Earle Jones, Konyberg, the gang of 12 killed off sci.math
And ravaged sci.physics with their endless poop and piss
In every thread of AP, so much so, that AP had to delete and repost
Every one of his science filled posts

Did the goofballs of science Weinberg, Gell-Mann, Baez, Brian Greene
Conway, Fefferman, Stillwell, Hales, Tao & Green
Make a pact with the stalker 12 brigade to destroy sci.math and sci.physics
At last?

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-28 00:34:30 UTC

Lawrence Bacow, is Harvard prepared to refund to parents and students their tuition// Christopher Eisgruber of Princeton refund // L Reif of MIT refund // Shirley Ann Jackson of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute refund

AP writes: Parents and students, beware of Universities that feed you b.s., propaganda like 10 OR 4 = 14 when you all know it is 10 AND 4 = 14, that a ellipse is never a conic, and that no-one in college math is teaching a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, all because they are too lazy and too dumb to fix their mistakes, so I recommend you ask for a refund of your tuition.

These colleges and universities never fix their mistakes but rather send out some loud dumb loudmouth in the likes of kibo Parry Moroney to paper over their academic swindle.

Michael Moroney wrote:
3:26 PM (3 hours ago) 27May 2019
Moroney math failure, here is where the fool thinks 938 is short of 945 by 12%, and he pretends he is an electrical engineer. Perhaps the first e.e. in the world that cannot do a percentage correctly

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

Post by Michael Moroney
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass

> of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Here is where the kibo Parry Moroney swindler and propagandist says this is a proof of ellipse

Post by Michael Moroney
Below you will find a simple *proof* that shows that certain conic sections _are_ ellipses.
^ x
|
-+- <= x=h
.' | `.
. | .
| | |
' | '
`. | .'
y <----------+ <= x=0

.
/|\
/ | \
/b | \
/---+---' <= x = h
/ |' \
/ ' | \
/ ' | \
x = 0 => '-------+-------\
/ a | \
r(x) = a - ((a-b)/h)x and d(x) = a - ((a+b)/h)x, hence
y(x)^2 = r(x)^2 - d(x)^2 = ab - ab(2x/h - 1)^2 = ab(1 - 4(x - h/2)^2/h^2.
Hence (1/ab)y(x)^2 + (4/h^2)(x - h/2)^2 = 1 ...equation of an ellipse
qed

Parents and students, stop these swindlers from taking your thousands and thousands of dollars to brainwash you with 10 OR 4 = 14 when even your local village idiot knows it is 10 AND 4 = 14. Stop being victims of education parasites!!

Parents and Students shout-- your tired and not taking the victimization any more.

Michael Moroney

2019-05-28 00:38:02 UTC

Subject: Re: Announcement:: AP's Calculus book most recent best seller--World's
First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition by
Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Announcement:: AP's Calculus book most recent best seller--World's First
Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition by Archimedes
Plutonium (Author)

WARNING TO PARENTS: Archimedes Plutonium is offering to teach your children
his broken physics and math. BEWARE! He will corrupt the minds of your
children! He teaches bizarre false physics, that there are no negative
numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine wave isn't a sine wave plus many,
many other instances of bad math and physics.

He has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books on Usenet.
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
on Kindle. This has greatly increased the risk to our students!

One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as
3 AND 2 = 5. His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll
post a false statement that nobody believes, such as 3 OR 2 = 5, say that
it is false, but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false
statement such as 3 AND 2 = 5, in order to really confuse future computer
scientists. It is important for future computer scientists to remember that
in the bitwise Boolean logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2.
Don't let Plutonium's bad logic confuse you!

Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of children like this.
Perhaps he wants everyone to be a failure at math and physics, just like he
is. Perhaps he is an agent of Putin and Russia, or maybe of China, in order
to make sure they will continue to dominate the trade economy. Maybe he is a
minion of Kim Jong Un of North Korea. But the point is, stay away, if he
offers to give or sell you his dangerous book. Especially now since they are
available for free from otherwise legitimate Amazon.

In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god. You can recognize
the symbol of this evil pagan cult, which is an ascii-art cosmic butthole.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-28 07:44:17 UTC

Stanford's Alexander Fetter, John Lipa, William Little, Douglas Osheroff, David Ritson, is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole
AP writes: never any math, never any physics out of kibo-Moroney, only stalker hate speak

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-28 20:57:34 UTC

MIT's L Reif, John Bush, Herman Chernoff, Henry Cohn, Laurent Demanet, Richard Dudley, Jörn Dunkel, is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Autistic

AP writes: never any math, never any physics out of kibo-Moroney, only stalker hate speak

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #293,690 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#18 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#70 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#471 in Calculus (Books)

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-29 01:50:30 UTC

MIT's_Victor Kac, Steven Kleiman, Daniel Kleitman, Andrew Lawrie, Tom Leighton, George Lusztig, is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

AP writes: never any math, never any physics out of kibo-Moroney, only stalker hate speak

o-:^>___?
`~~c--^c'
Navy dog says: quick, get a bag lunch for kibo, I really can't watch this, for AP is going to spin the stalker kibo Parry Moroney so fast and so hard as to catapult him to the Moon, give him a bag lunch on his way to the Moon.

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
• Be the first to review this item
•
•
•
•
•
• See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Read less

Length: 14 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $0.99 What's this?

File Size: 1629 KB
Print Length: 14 pages
Publication Date: April 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QRPZQ4Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

 Would you like to tell us about a lower price?

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #293,690 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#18 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#70 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#471 in Calculus (Books)

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-29 20:08:22 UTC

John Baez_Adam G. Riess,Makoto Kobayashi,Toshihide Maskawa,Yoichiro Nambu,John C. Mather,George F. Smoot, is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Autistic

why does not Baez, totally worthless in science, just change his name to abu Re: 1kicking out stalkers-- Jan Burse, Dan Christensen, John Baez //

Post by Michael Moroney
blow it out your ass ... oh,
what was that smell, in the first place

***@gmail.com

4/5/17

stalkers out kciking cans

yup, complex field is tres c00l

Post by Michael Moroney
Only if you failed Calculus would you think that

nanadittos ... when you ever have any result
from ye olde mathe, I'm sure that it will be new -- to you

American History Connecting with the Past 15th Edition by Alan Brinkley (Test Bank) (1)
By ***@gmail.com 1 post 4 views updated Mar 23

American Democracy Now 4th Edition by Brigid Callahan Harrison (Test Bank) (1)
By abu ahmed 1 post 4 views updated Mar 23

AP writes: instead of spamming newsgroups, why not do something worthwhile-- Confirm real electron is 105MeV, real proton is 840MeV and that little particle JJ Thomson discovered in 1897 turns out to be not the atom electron but rather the Dirac magnetic monopole.

AP writes: Is the reason Physicists have not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV not 938, because its scientists behave much like stalker kibo Parry Moroney-- cesspool mind of hatred with daily hate sheets on people rather than spend their daily activity on uncovering the true proton is 840MeV stuck with the real electron as muon doing a Faraday Law dance inside the atom making electricity and the .5MeV particle is Dirac's magnetic monopole.

o-:^>___?
`~~c--^c'
Navy dog says: holy holy smokes, will you look at that, Archie is the only one doing physics and all the others are drinking coffee with their Danish rolls

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
• Be the first to review this item
•
•
•
•
•
• See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Read less

Length: 14 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $0.99 What's this?

File Size: 1629 KB
Print Length: 14 pages
Publication Date: April 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QRPZQ4Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

 Would you like to tell us about a lower price?

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #293,690 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#18 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#70 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#471 in Calculus (Books)

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS (textbook in the making-- journal textbook): journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 328 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1968 KB
Print Length: 328 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-06-01 01:42:05 UTC

Math Failure

MIT's_ Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young
is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Richard E. Taylor,Carlo Rubbia,Simon van der Meer,William Alfred Fowler,Kenneth G. Wilson,
James Watson Cronin is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Autistic
Autistic

why does not Baez, totally worthless in science, just change his name to abu Re: 1kicking out stalkers-- Jan Burse, Dan Christensen, John Baez //

blow it out your ass ... oh,
what was that smell, in the first place

***@gmail.com

4/5/17

stalkers out kciking cans

yup, complex field is tres c00l

Only if you failed Calculus would you think that

nanadittos ... when you ever have any result
from ye olde mathe, I'm sure that it will be new -- to you

AP writes: instead of spamming newsgroups, why not do something worthwhile-- Confirm real electron is 105MeV, real proton is 840MeV and that little particle JJ Thomson discovered in 1897 turns out to be not the atom electron but rather the Dirac magnetic monopole.

AP writes: Is the reason Physicists have not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV not 938, because its scientists behave much like stalker kibo Parry Moroney-- cesspool mind of hatred with daily hate sheets on people rather than spend their daily activity on uncovering the true proton is 840MeV stuck with the real electron as muon doing a Faraday Law dance inside the atom making electricity and the .5MeV particle is Dirac's magnetic monopole.

o-:^>___?
`~~c--^c'
Navy dog says: holy holy smokes, will you look at that, Archie is the only one doing physics and all the others are drinking coffee with their Danish rolls and spewing ad hominem

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
• Be the first to review this item
•
•
•
•
•
• See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Read less

Length: 14 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $0.99 What's this?

File Size: 1629 KB
Print Length: 14 pages
Publication Date: April 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QRPZQ4Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

 Would you like to tell us about a lower price?

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #293,690 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#18 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#70 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#471 in Calculus (Books)

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS (textbook in the making-- journal textbook): journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 328 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1968 KB
Print Length: 328 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-06-29 06:40:24 UTC

Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
Math Minnow
Autistic

AP writes: I do not think Harvard is a runt. I think kibo Parry Moroney is insane and evil for stalking 28 years non stop and needs to be kicked out of Usenet

kibo Parry Moroney and Harvard fail at High School Math, fail at Angular Momentum// both think a proton is 938MeV with electron at .5MeV when truly they are 840MeV to 105MeV//both fail math with Ellipse never a conic and a geometry proof of Calculus

True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.

Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2

Length: 1154 pages

Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.

Length: 35 pages

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.

The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.

Length: 115 pages

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 361 pages

AP's periodic journal of fakeries in science: Magazine of science and math fakes foisted on general public Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The world is tired of "peer reviewed science" masquerading as the truth of science, when it is often the case that peer reviewed is false and fake science, even anti-science, as entrenched pork barrel money machines that look more towards "money money money". Or the peer review of magazines and journals that also look more towards "money" as a promotion ladder for unscrupulous professors climbing a promotion ladder at the school they teach. Publish, publish, publish, but seldom truth truth truth.

April 2019 issue-- discusses black holes as pure science fiction fakeries for a world that has a Pauli Exclusion Principle PEP, is a world that cannot simultaneously have a black hole. Physicists just never learned any logic to know that science cannot hold a contradiction. All science laws breakdown the minute you accept contradictions. Either the world has PEP but no black holes, or, the world has both, still a contradiction. Cover picture is HD98800 which is two binary star pairs and looks better as a black hole than does the fake recent black hole photo.

May issue --discusses the unwillingness of scientists and mathematicians to accept true science such as the ellipse is never a conic even when given a High School proof the ellipse is not a conic. And psychology is discussed as to "hate-envy-motivation" of scientists that blocks their minds from accepting the truth of science.

June issue of 2019-- discusses why and what the fake "gravity waves" reports from LIGO; what those reports really mean and measure.

July issue-- as yet to be decided, for the world of fake science is a long list to chose from..

Editor in chief of this magazine journal, AP

File Size: 1759 KB
Print Length: 31 pages

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Length: 12 pages

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Length: 14 pages

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

1- Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-06-29 15:43:03 UTC

Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
Math Minnow
Autistic

AP writes: I do not think Harvard is a runt. I think kibo Parry Moroney is insane and evil for stalking 28 years non stop and needs to be kicked out of Usenet
KO0kbabble.

AP writes: the only noticeable kook around here is the shithead kibo Parry Moroney and needs to be kicked out

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
kibo Parry Moroney and Harvard fail at High School Math, fail at Angular Momentum// both think a proton is 938MeV with electron at .5MeV when truly they are 840MeV to 105MeV//both fail math with Ellipse never a conic and a geometry proof of Calculus
True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.
Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2
Length: 1154 pages
Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.
Length: 35 pages
Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.
The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.
Length: 115 pages
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.
I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.
What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.
Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!
Length: 361 pages
AP's periodic journal of fakeries in science: Magazine of science and math fakes foisted on general public Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
The world is tired of "peer reviewed science" masquerading as the truth of science, when it is often the case that peer reviewed is false and fake science, even anti-science, as entrenched pork barrel money machines that look more towards "money money money". Or the peer review of magazines and journals that also look more towards "money" as a promotion ladder for unscrupulous professors climbing a promotion ladder at the school they teach. Publish, publish, publish, but seldom truth truth truth.
April 2019 issue-- discusses black holes as pure science fiction fakeries for a world that has a Pauli Exclusion Principle PEP, is a world that cannot simultaneously have a black hole. Physicists just never learned any logic to know that science cannot hold a contradiction. All science laws breakdown the minute you accept contradictions. Either the world has PEP but no black holes, or, the world has both, still a contradiction. Cover picture is HD98800 which is two binary star pairs and looks better as a black hole than does the fake recent black hole photo.
May issue --discusses the unwillingness of scientists and mathematicians to accept true science such as the ellipse is never a conic even when given a High School proof the ellipse is not a conic. And psychology is discussed as to "hate-envy-motivation" of scientists that blocks their minds from accepting the truth of science.
June issue of 2019-- discusses why and what the fake "gravity waves" reports from LIGO; what those reports really mean and measure.
July issue-- as yet to be decided, for the world of fake science is a long list to chose from..
Editor in chief of this magazine journal, AP
File Size: 1759 KB
Print Length: 31 pages
AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.
Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.
Length: 12 pages
How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.
But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.
Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.
Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.
Length: 14 pages
World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.
The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.
Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.
Length: 29 pages
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
Length: 21 pages
1- Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
1- https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
1- Archimedes Plutonium

Michael Moroney

2019-06-29 18:07:40 UTC

Yes, so, like the ellipse is never a conic cut, always a cylinder cut. What is
wrong with just being honest and truthful.
Subject: kicking out the sci.physics scumbag shithead kibo Parry Moroney-- no science only hate spiel stalker

How many times do I have to tell you, kooktard, if you attack me I attack back. You
keep attacking me, so I guess you must like it when I attack back.

Either that, or you really are too dumb and stoopid to understand "if you attack me
I attack back".

And now you even attack me when I point out that Sefton is babbling nonsense.

How dumb and stoopid is that, Uncle Al?

"I cannot believe how incredibly stupid Archie-Poo is. I mean rock-hard
stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. Surface of Venus
under 80 atmospheres of red hot carbon dioxide and sulfuric acid vapor
dehydrated for 300 million years rock-hard stupid. Stupid so stupid that
it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different sensorium of
stupid. Archie-Poo is trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid so
collapsed upon itself that it is within its own Schwarzschild radius.
Black hole stupid. Stupid gotten so dense and massive that no intellect
can escape. Singularity stupid. Archie-Poo emits more stupid/second than
our entire galaxy otherwise emits stupid/year. Quasar stupid. Nothing
else in the universe can be this stupid. Archie-Poo is an oozingly
putrescent primordial fragment from the original Big Bang of Stupid, a
pure essence of stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond
the laws of physics that define maximally extrapolated hypergeometric
n-dimensional backgroundless stupid as we can imagine it. Archie-Poo is
Planck stupid, a quantum foam of stupid, a vacuum decay of stupid, a grand
unified theory of stupid.

Archie-Poo is the epitome of stupidity, the epiphany of stupid, the
apotheosis of stupidity. Archie-poo is stooopid."

x-no-archive: yes

john

2019-07-10 19:29:21 UTC

MM
‘
And now you even attack me when I point out that Sefton is babbling nonsense.
’
For you, Mikey, EVERYTHING is nonsense.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-05 04:37:06 UTC

Moroney and Dr. Hales fail at High School Math, High School Logic// both teach Ellipse is a conic when it never was// teach 10 OR 4 = 14 when even the village idiot knows 10 AND 4=14 // never have a geometry proof of Calculus

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

AP writes: Yes, the math community needs to reject every math professor who cannot admit ellipse is never a conic but always a cylinder section. Reject those math professors who cannot see that 10 OR 4 = 14 is a colossal mistake. Reject every math professor who cannot see that true numbers of mathematics is Grid Numbers, and their Reals-Complex are a total joke and disaster.

Dr. Wiles, Dr. Conway, Dr. Stillwell, Dr. Hales, Dr. Tao are not mathematicians but worthless nattering nutters of mathematics, and instead of admitting ellipse is never a conic and 10 AND 4 = 14, these fools of mathematics send out the kook stalker brigade of kibo parry moroney, christensen, jan burse, franz, eastside, jan bielawski, chris thomasson, konyberg-- stalking creeps rather than admit they made a mistake.

AP writes: Dr. Wiles failed as a mathematician. He passed as a teacher of math, but failed as a mathematician, because for a true mathematician, they have the ability to correct the "past math". Wiles never had that ability and thus failed math. And when people do not have that ability, they end up doing the opposite-- pollute math with more cockamie garbage-- Wiles silly FLT fakery. Wiles is such a failure of math that to this very day-- he cannot accept the truth that ellipse is not a conic, but is a cylinder section. And instead of admitting the truth, Wiles sits back and watches shitheads like kibo Parry Moroney stalk the true mathematician. I am not saying Wiles pays Moroney to stalk, but am saying that he delights in stalkers chasing after AP.

AP writes: no, I am sure that Dr. Baez cannot teach his Univ Calif. Riverside students that 938 is 12% short of 945, but apparently Dr. Baez can teach another mistake-- ellipse as conic and get away with it

Post by Michael Moroney
Babbling kO0k

AP writes: no, I am sure that Dr. Baez cannot teach his Univ Calif. Riverside students that 938 is 12% short of 945, but apparently Dr. Baez can teach another mistake-- ellipse as conic and get away with it

Dr. Baez stupid but not depraved//what we throw out of Old Math-- excerpt from my textbook-- TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Post by Michael Moroney
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

AP writes: I do not think Dr. Baez of UC Riverside is depraved in physics, but I do wish he stop using all those fake names.
AP writes: sorry this is the shortest I can do

Is Franz & Gottingen too stupid to learn? what we throw out of Old Math-- excerpt from my textbook-- TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Post by Michael Moroney
Fired from my first real programming job.
Am I in the wrong field?

We know Dan Christensen and kibo Parry Moroney are imbeciles on math when they believe 10 OR 4 = 14, or a ellipse is a conic when it never was, or -- they can never do a geometry proof of fundamental theorem of calculus. But is Jan Burse and ETH matching imbeciles to Christensen and kibo? Or, the question is, can ETH and Jan Burse even comprehend any of the below excerpt, or have they become a wallflower of nonmath a wallflower of institutionalized idiocy?

what we throw out of Old Math-- excerpt from my textbook-- TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Excerpt from the textbook: Teaching True Mathematics

First off, let me make a long list of what is not mathematics and was thrown out as either fakery junk mathematics or was pared down immensely for being rather minutia or irrelevant or archaic and not worth the time in classroom education.

1) Rationals and Negative Numbers thrown out completely
2) Irrationals thrown out completely
3) Reals thrown out completely
4) Imaginary numbers and Complex numbers are b.s. and thrown out completely
5) Trigonometry pared down so much-- 90% thrown out, and no trigonometry ever enters Calculus
6) Continuum and continuity thrown out as horrible fakery
7) Topology is junk and a waste of time
8) Prime numbers is fakery for the Naturals never had division in the first place
9) Limit in Old Math was a horrible fakery
10) Lobachevsky, Riemann geometries and all NonEuclidean geometries are fakery and a waste of time
11) Boole logic a horrid gaggle of monumental mistakes
12) Galois Algebra of Group, Ring, Field a fakery and waste of time
13) Dimension stops at 3rd, and 3rd is the last and highest dimension possible, for there is no 4th or higher dimensions.
14) High School in Old Math spends too much time on quadratic equations with their negative numbers and imaginary-complex numbers when such never existed in the first place and where they violate a principle of algebra-- that an equation of algebra-- the right-side of the equation must always have a greater than zero number. So we throw out all quadratic equations of Old Math as fake math.
15) High School in Old Math spends too much time on teaching in geometry the congruence of SSS, ASA etc etc and we should pare that back somewhat, as excess teaching of a concept.
16) to be continued....

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 363 pages

Is ETH and Jan Burse too dumb to learn ellipse is never a conic thus too dumb to ever learn real proton is 840MeV not 938

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Autistic
Physics minnow

AP writes: Unpacking Moroney, suggests the reason ETH and Harvard-MIT is too dumb to see that 9 x 105MeV = 945MeV and the proton is clocked in at 938MeV with only a less than 1% sigma error, implies the real proton is 840MeV with a muon = real electron attached. Since none at MIT-Harvard could ever understand AP's proof ellipse is never a conic section (for that is the oval,not the ellipse) but rather the ellipse is a cylinder section; stands to reason they are far far too stupid at Harvard-MIT to see real proton is 840MeV.

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Here is a case where a professor of math and physics, John Baez still believes in 10 OR 4 = 14 when even the local village idiot knows it is 10 AND 4 = 14. Teaches the idiocy of a ellipse is a conic when even a High School student can prove in front of the face of Dr. Baez, with a Kerr jar lid and paper cone that the slant cut is a OVAL, never an ellipse. Yet we pay this ignorant fool of Baez to teach his nonsense.

Where Dr. Baez stalked AP for years and years on the Internet under stupid fake names. Is this what Baez calls-- crackpot list-- to see a grown professor stalking posters, yet the fool still nattering nutters 10 OR 4 = 14. Dr. Baez should start an asylum list to pair up with his Crackpot list for he is ready to go.

why does not Baez, totally worthless in science, just change his name to abu Re: 1kicking out stalkers-- Jan Burse, Dan Christensen, John Baez //

Post by Michael Moroney
blow it out your ass ... oh,
what was that smell, in the first place

4/5/17
stalkers out kciking cans
yup, complex field is tres c00l

Post by Michael Moroney
Only if you failed Calculus would you think that

nanadittos ... when you ever have any result
from ye olde mathe, I'm sure that it will be new -- to you

Dr. Baez, instead of hiding behind fake names and spreading your idiocies in the newsgroups why not do something worthwhile.

AP writes: instead of spamming newsgroups, why not do something worthwhile-- Confirm real electron is 105MeV, real proton is 840MeV and that little particle JJ Thomson discovered in 1897 turns out to be not the atom electron but rather the Dirac magnetic monopole. But that is far too sage of advice for a nutcase of Dr. Baez.

AP writes: Is the reason Physicists have not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV not 938, because its scientists behave much like stalker kibo Parry Moroney-- cesspool mind of hatred with daily hate sheets on people rather than spend their daily activity on uncovering the true proton is 840MeV stuck with the real electron as muon doing a Faraday Law dance inside the atom making electricity and the .5MeV particle is Dirac's magnetic monopole.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
o-:^>___?
`~~c--^c'
Navy dog says: remember the time the failed engineer kibo Parry Moroney said 938 is short of 945 by 12%. How could any engineer pass school not knowing percentages?

Really pathetic, kibo Parry Moroney alleges he is a electrical engineer but the creep dunce idiot thinks 938 is 12% short of 945

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.

The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.
Length: 115 pages

True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.
Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2
Length: 1154 pages

Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.
Length: 41 pages

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!
Length: 363 pages

 
AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.
Length: 12 pages

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.
Length: 14 pages

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

1- Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
1-
1- https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
1- Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-17 02:13:13 UTC

I do not know if Harvard is equipped to re-do the Rutherford Experiment of 1908, any better than MIT. There is the danger of alpha particles. I think Cal Tech is the better school to re-do the experiment with carbon diamond or graphite

Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:35:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
To: Plutonium Atom Universe <plutonium-atom-***@googlegroups.com>
Subject: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite or diamond-- atoms have
no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment done over to tell the
real truth about atom geometry Re: Radioactivity facts on alpha particles

instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry Re: Radioactivity facts on alpha particles

Alright, in the below it seems at first glance to be a difficult Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment Do-over. But I think it is an easy do-over. I would hazard to guess that since 1913, there have been thousands of repeat experiments, all using Gold foil. And all assuming of a nucleus in atoms.

Where, if, there was one decent scientist who would go into the lab and use carbon-- graphite or diamond, would find the case that atoms of carbon have no nucleus. And instead, the ricochet or rebound of alpha particles at 180 degree from source, can be only explained as a bouncing off of a carbon atom skin coating. See my 3 possibilities below.

On Tuesday, July 16, 2019 at 6:26:13 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
So very much of physics is ultimately down to the skin coating that makes up the outer surface of each and every atom. This is much about Radioactivity.

And a major major change in Physics is the physics of the geometry of atoms.

Old Physics got the idea that atoms were small balls with 99.9% of the mass residing in a dense nuclear center, with electrons as tiny tiny mass and huge space outside the nucleus, as a dot cloud where each dot is a fraction of .5 MeV for a electron, with the proton at 938MeV and the neutron at 940MeV residing in the nucleus. They justified the neutron by saying it allows the protons to stay together and not repel. This was the silly stupid view of Physics of Old Physics.

New Physics says their is no repulsion in EM theory. There is no nucleus in atoms, for the proton is 840 MeV and consists of 8 windings of a coil, while electron is the muon as 1 ring acting as a Faraday law bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil and producing magnetic monopoles, some of which are .5MeV monopoles. These monopoles are stored inside of growing neutrons. Neutrons act as capacitors, growing from the produced monopoles until they grow to 945MeV and then they cause that atom to increase in atomic number, going from say carbon to nitrogen, or fluorine to neon, etc. The neutron and monopoles reside on the surface of atoms, the interior of atoms is a Faraday coil with muon magnet going around and thrusting through proton coil, thus the atom is a torus with neutrons and monopoles as dielectric skin coating. The center of atoms is virtually a void, a donut hole analogy.

What that New Physics picture tells us to do, is recheck the old Rutherford, Geiger Marsden experiment where they conclude that the bounced back alpha particles fired upon a gold leaf foil, they interpreted that bounce back as meaning the atom has a dense nuclear region.

What we must do is repeat that experiment to show that firing alpha particles at gold leaf foil, is either,

1) the alpha particles enter inside the torus ring and naturally follow the torus path and thus are deflected back 180 degrees to the firing site.

Or,

2) the alpha particles are not entering inside the torus ring but rather are circling around the top or bottom circular path of the outside of the torus and thus deflected back 180 degrees to source.

Or,

3) the alpha particles deflected back to source are caused by the outer skin coating of the gold atoms is sufficient enough to bounce back at 180 degrees a few of the alpha particles.

I favor this third one as the likely true answer. I am betting that no physicist since 1913, had the brains to try out carbon, where carbon with its 6 protons and 6 neutrons does not have adequate skin coating cover. Gold you see has 79 protons but has 197- 79 = 118 neutrons. This is the reason atoms have to have more and more neutrons, to make a increasing need of skin coating, because the size of the gold atom torus is so large, that you need so many more neutrons to cover the torus outer surface. In fact the mathematics of how many neutrons a atom has is a logarithmic function-- meaning-- surface area of torus is logarithmic increase.

And, once real physicists, not these present day hacks of physics chasing black holes, chasing Higgs boson, chasing fusion energy, chasing gravity waves. Once the real physicists find that the rebounded alpha particle upon carbon is not what supports a "nuclear atom" but rather, supports the idea that nucleus of atoms is bogus, is fake science.

Now some will quickly think that biology is a culprit of the fake nuclear atom, thinking that by 1800s and especially 1908-1913, that cell biology proved a nuclear cell. And it is easy to think that since most cells, not all, have a nucleus, that surely physics would have the nuclear atom. In fact, biology has Prokaryotic cells-- no nucleus, and the DNA is loose and in the form of geometry of a ring or loop around the cell, much like a torus loop.

So, if in 1913, if Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden had studied or known of Prokaryotic cells more than Eukaryotic cells, then physics perhaps would have taken a better turn to truth.

But looking at the history, it appears biology was not fully aware of cells without a nucleus, and so impossible for Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden to have known of a living cell that has no nucleus-- history-- Stanier, van Niel, 1962, and Chatton's 1937. I do not know if Rutherford in 1908 wanted to know the best science of living cells-- whether a cell can exist without a nucleus, I do not know what the situation was in 1908. But I am certain that all three, Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden knew that biology cells have a well defined nucleus and am certain that swayed their interpretation of their gold leaf experiment.

And what I am saying is that atoms have no nucleus, and the alpha particles are bouncing off the surface of atoms to rebound back to the source.

This would be a major major change in all of physics-- atoms have no nucleus. And just one more result or fallout of the discovery that the real proton is 840 MeV, real electron is the muon at 105 MeV and the .5 MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole.

How one great discovery leads to thousands more, great discoveries.

In our modern day instruments, I believe we can now go through all three of the above scenarios and find out which is the true reason of the Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden experiment of 1908-1913.

Their is nothing wrong with their experiment-- for it is true that a few are deflected back 180 degrees. But there is everything wrong with their interpretation of why some alpha particles are deflected back. The entire view of a nuclear atom is a silly stupid view, for it places no job, no function, no duty, no task of subatomic particles. A stupid silly view of protons neutrons and electrons as do-nothing subatomic particles. Once you place a job or task upon proton and neutron and electron such as Faraday Law, then you cannot have the silly stupid nuclear atom.

I am going to bet that the (3) is true-- that the alpha particle bounces off the skin coating of carbon atoms. Provided, if, any alpha particles reflect back at 180 degrees.

AP

Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.

Length: 124 pages

 
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-18 06:22:32 UTC

Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 23:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
To: Plutonium Atom Universe <plutonium-atom-***@googlegroups.com>
Subject: a bit of trouble here Re: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite
or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment
done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry

a bit of trouble here Re: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry

On Tuesday, July 16, 2019 at 2:35:40 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Alright, in the below it seems at first glance to be a difficult Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment Do-over. But I think it is an easy do-over. I would hazard to guess that since 1913, there have been thousands of repeat experiments, all using Gold foil. And all assuming of a nucleus in atoms.

Where, if, there was one decent scientist who would go into the lab and use carbon-- graphite or diamond, would find the case that atoms of carbon have no nucleus. And instead, the ricochet or rebound of alpha particles at 180 degree from source, can be only explained as a bouncing off of a carbon atom skin coating. See my 3 possibilities below.

On Tuesday, July 16, 2019 at 6:26:13 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
So very much of physics is ultimately down to the skin coating that makes up the outer surface of each and every atom. This is much about Radioactivity.

And a major major change in Physics is the physics of the geometry of atoms.

Old Physics got the idea that atoms were small balls with 99.9% of the mass residing in a dense nuclear center, with electrons as tiny tiny mass and huge space outside the nucleus, as a dot cloud where each dot is a fraction of .5 MeV for a electron, with the proton at 938MeV and the neutron at 940MeV residing in the nucleus. They justified the neutron by saying it allows the protons to stay together and not repel. This was the silly stupid view of Physics of Old Physics.

New Physics says their is no repulsion in EM theory. There is no nucleus in atoms, for the proton is 840 MeV and consists of 8 windings of a coil, while electron is the muon as 1 ring acting as a Faraday law bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil and producing magnetic monopoles, some of which are .5MeV monopoles. These monopoles are stored inside of growing neutrons. Neutrons act as capacitors, growing from the produced monopoles until they grow to 945MeV and then they cause that atom to increase in atomic number, going from say carbon to nitrogen, or fluorine to neon, etc. The neutron and monopoles reside on the surface of atoms, the interior of atoms is a Faraday coil with muon magnet going around and thrusting through proton coil, thus the atom is a torus with neutrons and monopoles as dielectric skin coating. The center of atoms is virtually a void, a donut hole analogy.

What that New Physics picture tells us to do, is recheck the old Rutherford, Geiger Marsden experiment where they conclude that the bounced back alpha particles fired upon a gold leaf foil, they interpreted that bounce back as meaning the atom has a dense nuclear region.

What we must do is repeat that experiment to show that firing alpha particles at gold leaf foil, is either,

1) the alpha particles enter inside the torus ring and naturally follow the torus path and thus are deflected back 180 degrees to the firing site.

Or,

2) the alpha particles are not entering inside the torus ring but rather are circling around the top or bottom circular path of the outside of the torus and thus deflected back 180 degrees to source.

Or,

3) the alpha particles deflected back to source are caused by the outer skin coating of the gold atoms is sufficient enough to bounce back at 180 degrees a few of the alpha particles.

I favor this third one as the likely true answer. I am betting that no physicist since 1913, had the brains to try out carbon, where carbon with its 6 protons and 6 neutrons does not have adequate skin coating cover. Gold you see has 79 protons but has 197- 79 = 118 neutrons. This is the reason atoms have to have more and more neutrons, to make a increasing need of skin coating, because the size of the gold atom torus is so large, that you need so many more neutrons to cover the torus outer surface. In fact the mathematics of how many neutrons a atom has is a logarithmic function-- meaning-- surface area of torus is logarithmic increase.

And, once real physicists, not these present day hacks of physics chasing black holes, chasing Higgs boson, chasing fusion energy. Once the real physicists find that the rebounded alpha particle upon carbon is not what supports a "nuclear atom" but rather, supports the idea that nucleus of atoms is bogus, is fake science.

Now some will quickly think that biology is a culprit of the fake nuclear atom, thinking that by 1800s and especially 1908-1913, that cell biology proved a nuclear cell. And it is easy to think that since most cells, not all, have a nucleus, that surely physics would have the nuclear atom. In fact, biology has Prokaryotic cells-- no nucleus, and the DNA is loose and in the form of geometry of a ring or loop around the cell, much like a torus loop.

So, if in 1913, if Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden had studied or known of Prokaryotic cells more than Eukaryotic cells, then physics perhaps would have taken a better turn to truth.

But looking at the history, it appears biology was not fully aware of cells without a nucleus, and so impossible for Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden to have known of a living cell that has no nucleus-- history-- Stanier, van Niel, 1962, and Chatton's 1937. I do not know if Rutherford in 1908 wanted to know the best science of living cells-- whether a cell can exist without a nucleus, I do not know what the situation was in 1908. But I am certain that all three, Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden knew that biology cells have a well defined nucleus and am certain that swayed their interpretation of their gold leaf experiment.

And what I am saying is that atoms have no nucleus, and the alpha particles are bouncing off the surface of atoms to rebound back to the source.

This would be a major major change in all of physics-- atoms have no nucleus. And just one more result or fallout of the discovery that the real proton is 840 MeV, real electron is the muon at 105 MeV and the .5 MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole.

How one great discovery leads to thousands more, great discoveries.

In our modern day instruments, I believe we can now go through all three of the above scenarios and find out which is the true reason of the Rutherford, Geiger, Marsden experiment of 1908-1913.

Their is nothing wrong with their experiment-- for it is true that a few are deflected back 180 degrees. But there is everything wrong with their interpretation of why some alpha particles are deflected back. The entire view of a nuclear atom is a silly stupid view, for it places no job, no function, no duty, no task of subatomic particles. A stupid silly view of protons neutrons and electrons as do-nothing subatomic particles. Once you place a job or task upon proton and neutron and electron such as Faraday Law, then you cannot have the silly stupid nuclear atom.

I am going to bet that the (3) is true-- that the alpha particle bounces off the skin coating of carbon atoms. Provided, if, any alpha particles reflect back at 180 degrees.

Just when I thought I was going to treat myself to a 6 month vacation from this subject, I run across my old High School physics textbook talking about the Rutherford Geiger Marsden Experiment.

3rd edition, 1971 (actually I used a earlier edition in High School for I graduated 1968) PSSC PHYSICS, Haber-Schaim, Cross, Dodge, Walter on pages 554-555.

Quoting PSSC PHYSICS
"The first thing we learn with this apparatus is that most of the alpha particles pass through the 400 layers of atoms without appreciable change in their direction of motion. We can conclude that most of the inside of the atom has no hard, massive objects from which the alpha particles would bounce off at an angle."

Alright, I seemed to have ignored this fact and focused only on the alpha bullets deflected back to the radioactive source.

Can I account for that fact with my model of the atom as a large torus that has no nucleus but has a skin coating composed of neutrons windings and the proton is winding of rings for a Faraday Law. The muon is inside the proton coil torus as a Faraday Law bar magnet.

For the gold atom the protons are 79 would be 79x8 = 632 windings torus and 197-79 = 118 neutrons with 118x9 = 1062 windings to make a skin coating surface for the 632 windings of protons.

The alpha particle is 2x8 = 16 windings of a proton coil torus with 2x9 = 18 windings of a skin cover.

I think I can get by on this problem if I consider the size of a atom radius is directly proportional to atomic number. So for helium at 2 would be a radius 2 compared to a radius of 79. And so Circumference of torus with diameter 158, is roughly 496, and the circumference of a alpha particle is 3.14..x 4 = 12.5 roughly.

So now, for a gold atom with circumference 496 I have a ring winding of 632.

So, the picture that is emerging here, is like this graphic

| | | | as proton ring windings

and size of a alpha particle as O

And apparently then, what happens is that the O alpha particle can ram right into a few of these proton windings and not be affected, and 400 gold atoms and not be affected.

Now I need to explain the 180 degree rebound alpha particles.

I am in trouble here unless I can explain it away.

AP
 
5- Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
5-
5- https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
5- Archimedes Plutonium

Michael Moroney

2019-07-18 06:43:21 UTC

What we throw out of Old Math-- excerpt from my textbook-- TEACHING TRUE
MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; Kindle

No, Archie, don't use "we" just because your diseased cats are meowing!! They
are not telling you to throw stuff out of math, they are telling you that they are
hungry! Feed them!!! (and take them to the vet!!)

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-18 22:33:27 UTC

WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't become a victim of
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

AP writes: I agree for Harvard and Dr. Randall are only fostering more fake physics, where those nutters teach 10 OR 4 = 14 with ellipse a conic when it never was.

Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 23:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
To: Plutonium Atom Universe <plutonium-atom-***@googlegroups.com>
Subject: a bit of trouble here Re: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite
or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment
done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry

a bit of trouble here Re: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry

Just when I thought I was going to treat myself to a 6 month vacation from this subject, I run across my old High School physics textbook talking about the Rutherford Geiger Marsden Experiment.

3rd edition, 1971 (actually I used a earlier edition in High School for I graduated 1968) PSSC PHYSICS, Haber-Schaim, Cross, Dodge, Walter on pages 554-555.

Quoting PSSC PHYSICS
"The first thing we learn with this apparatus is that most of the alpha particles pass through the 400 layers of atoms without appreciable change in their direction of motion. We can conclude that most of the inside of the atom has no hard, massive objects from which the alpha particles would bounce off at an angle."

Alright, I seemed to have ignored this fact and focused only on the alpha bullets deflected back to the radioactive source.

Can I account for that fact with my model of the atom as a large torus that has no nucleus but has a skin coating composed of neutrons windings and the proton is winding of rings for a Faraday Law. The muon is inside the proton coil torus as a Faraday Law bar magnet.

For the gold atom the protons are 79 would be 79x8 = 632 windings torus and 197-79 = 118 neutrons with 118x9 = 1062 windings to make a skin coating surface for the 632 windings of protons.

The alpha particle is 2x8 = 16 windings of a proton coil torus with 2x9 = 18 windings of a skin cover.

I think I can get by on this problem if I consider the size of a atom radius is directly proportional to atomic number. So for helium at 2 would be a radius 2 compared to a radius of 79. And so Circumference of torus with diameter 158, is roughly 496, and the circumference of a alpha particle is 3.14..x 4 = 12.5 roughly.

So now, for a gold atom with circumference 496 I have a ring winding of 632.

So, the picture that is emerging here, is like this graphic

| | | | as proton ring windings

and size of a alpha particle as O

And apparently then, what happens is that the O alpha particle can ram right into a few of these proton windings and not be affected, and 400 gold atoms and not be affected.

Now I need to explain the 180 degree rebound alpha particles.

I am in trouble here unless I can explain it away.

AP

Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:35:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
To: Plutonium Atom Universe <plutonium-atom-***@googlegroups.com>
Subject: perhaps a resolution Re: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite
or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment
done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry

perhaps a resolution Re: instead of gold foil, use carbon graphite or diamond-- atoms have no nucleus //Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment done over to tell the real truth about atom geometry

I am pretty sure I know what the answer is here, my perplexing problem. If I look at volume of the gold atom versus volume of the alpha particle I have for radius 79 as 1,972,156 cubic volume and for alpha particle with radius 2 of volume 32 cubic volume. So that when the alpha particle slams into the gold atom torus, the material of the torus is so vastly spread around that it does encounter matter of the protons and neutrons, but the small amount of matter does not affect its travel through.

But now, how to explain those rare alpha rebounds at 180 degrees?

Here I am thinking that the 400 gold atoms bonded by metallic bond as this picture

[][][][][] 400 such gold atoms

And if a alpha particle enters the gold leaf such that those particles are perpendicular to the metallic bond capacitors --->[][][][][][]

That it is going to rebound back at 180degrees.

Now to prove my above, we need to do this experiment on 400 carbon atoms leaf thick in graphite.

Since the volume of carbon atom is 4*6^3 = 864 cubic volume and alpha particle is volume 32. That such numbers should yield a greater number of deflections, but of those deflections fewer 180 degree rebounds as in gold, provided there is any 180 degree rebound. When you have particles in collision of nearly the same size, you get more deflections rather than passing straight through.

AP

1.1- Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
1.1-
1.1- https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
1.1- Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-19 07:14:41 UTC

why does Harvard endorse insane stalkers kibo Parry Moroney when Harvard should be focused on confirming real proton is 840MeV, real electron is the muon and .5 MeV was the Dirac monopole

27 year long shithead stalker kibo Parry Moroney decided to share with us On Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 5:49:00 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

Math Failure

27 year long shithead stalker kibo Parry Moroney decided to share with us

Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics
WARNING TO STUDENTS: Don't become a victim of

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-19 18:44:42 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
why does Harvard endorse insane stalkers kibo Parry Moroney when Harvard should be focused on confirming real proton is 840MeV, real electron is the muon and .5 MeV was the Dirac monopole

27 year long shithead stalker kibo Parry Moroney decided to share with us On Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 5:49:00 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Runt of Math and Phlea of Physics
Math Failure

27 year long shithead stalker kibo Parry Moroney decided to share with us

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-20 01:59:33 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Mouse of Math
Math Failure
Runt of Math and Phlea of Physics
Math Failure
Minnow of Math and Runt of Physics

1.2- Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
1.2- https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
1.2- Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-11-20 06:04:48 UTC

#1
Atom Totality Universe: Atom Totality Series book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics book that explains what the universe is, and how it works. This is a continuation of the Atomic Theory by Democritus in Ancient Greek times. It adds one more fact to the Atomic Theory. That the Universe itself is one gigantic big atom. It completes the logic of science that Dr. Feynman wrote-- all things are made up of atoms -- and so, to complete that idea -- all things and the universe itself is an atom.
Length: 617 pages

Product details
File Size: 633 KB
Print Length: 617 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLP9NDR
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #578,229 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
                #1610 in Physics (Kindle Store)
                #8526 in Physics (Books)
                #18851 in Biological Sciences (Books)

#2
Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.

The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.
Length: 125 pages

Product details
File Size: 2364 KB
Print Length: 125 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: June 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07SW87BF5
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #285,417 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#826 in Astronomy (Books)
#166 in Astronomy (Kindle Store)
#671 in Physics (Kindle Store)

#3
Raw Research into ANGULAR-MOMENTUM DYNAMICS//Atom Totality series, book 3 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Warning to any reader. This research book is advanced and unless you know a lot of physics and math, you be advised that much is difficult to read.

No-one in the 20th century of physics understood what Angular Momentum truly was. Two of the best and finest mathematical physicists Dirac and Feynman missed understanding what Angular Momentum was. I say that because both believed you could have a electron at .5 MeV with proton at 938 MeV and have a hydrogen atom. When you fail at knowing what Angular Momentum is and what it is all about, then you will fail in realizing the true electron of atoms is the muon at 105 MeV and the true proton of atoms is 840 MeV, so that the muon and proton conduct Faraday's law inside of a hydrogen atom, or any atom for that sake.

Cover Picture is my handwritten like blackboard writing of the AP-EM Equations. Those equations get at the heart of what Angular Momentum means. And if you have no idea of what that math is, you be advised that this book is too difficult for you.
Length: 126 pages

Product details
File Size: 859 KB
Print Length: 126 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: August 30, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07XB9BLX2
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
 

#4
Raw Research into 3dimensional Calculus//Atom Totality series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

In doing the AP-EM Equations of electricity and magnetism, I found myself wanting the calculus for 4 variables in 3rd dimension. None exists in Old Math mathematics of a 3rd dimension calculus, thus I have to invent that new math. This is the raw research book that attempts to do just that. Warning to any reader, this is sophisticated mathematics and physics for which most readers require at least completing 1st year college calculus and 1st year college physics to fully appreciate perhaps even comprehend what is going on. I do not attempt to make this easy but attempting to find answers myself, so I have not the time to stop and explain. However, the general reader can learn snippets and pieces and sort of get the general drift of what is going on.

Cover picture: this is the third cover picture for this book. And may not be the last. This is terribly difficult new mathematics. The world has never seen 3rd dimensional calculus before, and that is exactly what this book tries to achieve in the derivative of angular momentum. This latest cover picture is a full torus and my hand held down planar torus, a squashed torus, the derivative of a full torus is a squashed full torus to be a planar ellipse. Terribly difficult because in this New Calculus, it is physics that is determining what 3rd dimension calculus must be, not as if the math pre-exists and waiting to be discovered, no, it is the physics that pre-exists and waiting to tell how the mathematics is going to be.

Length: 88 pages

Product details
File Size: 744 KB
Print Length: 88 pages
Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited
Publication Date: September 23, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07Y9H9KTT
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
 

#5
True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is everywhere.

Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2

Length: 1154 pages

File Size: 1991 KB
Print Length: 1154 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLVMMSZ
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
                Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #590,212 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
                #181 in General Chemistry & Reference
                #1324 in General Chemistry
                #1656 in Physics (Kindle Store)

Michael Moroney

2019-11-20 06:31:43 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
#5
True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J.
Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017,

WARNING TO PARENTS: Archimedes Plutonium is offering to teach your children his
broken physics and math. BEWARE! He will corrupt the minds of your children! He
teaches bizarre false physics and math, such as the ellipse isn't a conic
section, that there are no negative numbers, no complex numbers, that a sine
wave isn't sinusoidal, plus many, many other instances of bad math and physics.

He has previously tried to corrupt our youth by posting his books on Usenet.
Fortunately, this has failed so far, perhaps in part due to the fact Usenet
is an old, dying medium few students even know of, much less use. However, Mr.
Plutonium has somehow duped Amazon into providing his dangerous books for free
on Kindle. This has greatly increased the danger to our students!

One of his dangerous tricks is to teach false Boolean logic such as 3 AND 2 = 5.
His method at doing this is particularly insidious. He'll post a false
statement that nobody believes, such as 3 OR 2 = 5, say that it is false (which
it is), but then he'll try to replace it with another similar false statement
such as 3 AND 2 = 5, in order to really confuse future computer scientists. It
is important for future computer scientists to remember that in the bitwise
Boolean logic used by computers, 3 OR 2 = 3 and 3 AND 2 = 2. Don't let
Plutonium's bad logic confuse you!

Nobody knows why he wishes to corrupt the minds of our youth like this. Perhaps
he is envious of their potential success, which he never had because he is a
failure at math and science. So perhaps he wants everyone to be a failure at
math and physics, just like he is. Perhaps he is an agent of China, in order
for them to dominate the trade economy. Maybe he is a minion of Kim Jong Un of
North Korea. Most likely he is an agent of Putin and Russia, because he has
attempted to summon Russian robots in 2017 "to create a new, true mathematics".
But the point is, stay away, if he offers to give or sell you his dangerous
books. Especially now since they are available for free from otherwise
legitimate Amazon.

In addition, Plutonium wants to usurp good Christians by trying to convince
students to worship his evil pagan Plutonium atom god of failure. You can
recognize the symbol of this evil pagan cult, which is an ascii-art cosmic
butthole.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-05 14:34:28 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Math Failure

MIT's_ Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young
is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole
Richard E. Taylor,Carlo Rubbia,Simon van der Meer,William Alfred Fowler,Kenneth G. Wilson,
James Watson Cronin is kibo Moroney spam the reason you not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV, real electron=105MeV and .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole

Autistic
Autistic

why does not Baez, totally worthless in science, just change his name to abu Re: 1kicking out stalkers-- Jan Burse, Dan Christensen, John Baez //

blow it out your ass ... oh,
what was that smell, in the first place

4/5/17
stalkers out kciking cans
yup, complex field is tres c00l

Only if you failed Calculus would you think that

nanadittos ... when you ever have any result
from ye olde mathe, I'm sure that it will be new -- to you
AP writes: instead of spamming newsgroups, why not do something worthwhile-- Confirm real electron is 105MeV, real proton is 840MeV and that little particle JJ Thomson discovered in 1897 turns out to be not the atom electron but rather the Dirac magnetic monopole.
AP writes: Is the reason Physicists have not yet confirmed real proton is 840MeV not 938, because its scientists behave much like stalker kibo Parry Moroney-- cesspool mind of hatred with daily hate sheets on people rather than spend their daily activity on uncovering the true proton is 840MeV stuck with the real electron as muon doing a Faraday Law dance inside the atom making electricity and the .5MeV particle is Dirac's magnetic monopole.
o-:^>___?
`~~c--^c'
Navy dog says: holy holy smokes, will you look at that, Archie is the only one doing physics and all the others are drinking coffee with their Danish rolls and spewing ad hominem
AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item
#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference
See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy
The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.
Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.
Read less
Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat
Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
• Be the first to review this item
•
•
•
•
•
• See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.
But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.
Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.
Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.
Read less
Length: 14 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $0.99 What's this?
File Size: 1629 KB
Print Length: 14 pages
Publication Date: April 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QRPZQ4Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
 Would you like to tell us about a lower price?
World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item
See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy
Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.
The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.
Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.
Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #293,690 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#18 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#70 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
#471 in Calculus (Books)
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item
See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy
Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
Length: 21 pages
File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS (textbook in the making-- journal textbook): journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item
#1 New Releasein General Geometry
See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy
This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.
I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.
What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.
Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!
Length: 328 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
File Size: 1968 KB
Print Length: 328 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-07-05 18:15:35 UTC

Excerpt from my latest book:

For iridium 77Ir, its radius would be 193-77 = 116 pm.

Now both would be approximately the very same force strength of chemical bond as is carbon covalent bond.

Carbon radius is 12-6 = 6 pm

Now, do I have enough numbers data to tell me the length of the Carbon atom Lewis Arm?

AP writes: no use in asking MIT, for they still think the ellipse is a conic when the slant cut of a cone is never an ellipse but rather a oval.

Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.

Length: 69 pages

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-24 06:20:20 UTC

Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU versus Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

AP writes: 27 years of nothing but ad hominem

Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU versus Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU versus Gilbert Strang,L. Reif,William Bertozzi, MIT are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they really are 840MeV, 105MeV in order to have chemistry bonding

Path: o145ni2280wme.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!nntpfeed.proxad.net!news.muarf.org!news.uzoreto.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!4.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ***@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math
Subject: Re: Archimedes "Village Idiot" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 00:13:10 +0000 (UTC)

Post by Michael Moroney
Was he too much of a failure way
back then as well?

The world no longer needs physics professors who cannot understand Angular Momentum and that the Chemical bond cannot exist with proton = 938MeV, electron= .5MeV. The true proton is 840MeV, true electron= muon = 105MeV and the little particle of .5MeV that JJ Thomson discovered is actually Dirac's magnetic monopole.

Only thing out of Moroney in 26 years is nonstop hate spew; it is not misogyny nor misanthropy but the dark shades of insanity. Is Moroney a robot of MIT, CMU???
AP writes: quick question Moroney, is Jim Rohr, Farnam Jahanian, Laurie Weingart a member of the Carnegie Mellon Computer Club and the reason for my posts being delayed to sci.math?

nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu

So, Carnegie Mellon Computer Club?

Daniela L. Rus with MIT lcs

!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!

No math and no physics content in each and every Moroney post-- did he graduate from MIT or Carnegie Mellon, would you think?
PATH nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu

Moroney-- hates everyone and everything-- even himself-- is there a word for such a person in the English language, not misogyny nor misanthropy, other than shithead

..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am like Hanson, a stalker hatemonger nonstop, only I use excrement less often than Hanson. I post under the name Moroney or kibo or dozens of other fake names for hatred is my game, not science. I love it when Usenet was created because I was a bully but did not want to be pommeled into the ground for spitting hatred on people and Usenet allows me to spit hatred 24 hours 360 days. I am a hate monger who hates people and hates science-- for I am a worthless shithead of a living being-Moroney. As kibo Moroney shein, I want to teach new kids on the block how to pester, harass, authors, just as I have done for 26 years-- the new kids of Dan Christensen, Jan Burse (if not in prison), Zelos Malum, qwbr, Jan Bielawski, Erik Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, Franz, teach them how to be a shithead just like me.
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'

Moroney math failure, here is where the fool thinks 938 is short of 945 by 12%, and he pretends he is an electrical engineer. Perhaps the first e.e. in the world that cannot do a percentage correctly

Carnegie Mellon Univ. math dept
Jeremy Avigad, Steve Awodey, Egon Balas, Manuel Blum, Tom Bohman, Boris Bukh, Clinton Conley, Gerard P. Cornuejols, James Cummings, Irene Fonseca, Florian Frick, Alan Frieze, Rami Grossberg, Yu Gu, William J. Hrusa, Gautam Iyer, David Kinderlehrer, Dmitry Kramkov, John P. Lehoczky, Giovanni Leoni, Po-Shen Loh, Johannes Muhle-Karbe, Wesley Pegden, Robert Pego, Javier Pena, Agoston Pisztora, Hayden Schaeffer, Jack Schaeffer, Ernest Schimmerling, Steven E. Shreve, Dejan Slepcev, Richard Statman, Shlomo Ta'asan, Ian Tice, Tomasz Tkocz, Noel J. Walkington, Franziska Weber

president cmu: Farnum Jahanian, computer science

MIT math dept.

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

President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)

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

LIST OF Failed Physicists, in no order

Peter Higgs
Rainer Weiss
Kip S. Thorne
Barry C. Barish
David J. Thouless
F. Duncan M. Haldane
John M. Kosterlitz
Takaaki Kajita
Arthur B. McDonald
Francois Englert
Saul Perlmutter
Brian P. Schmidt
Adam G. Riess
Makoto Kobayashi
Toshihide Maskawa
Yoichiro Nambu
John C. Mather
George F. Smoot
Roy J. Glauber
David J. Gross
Hugh David Politzer
Frank Wilczek
Raymond Davis Jr.
Masatoshi Koshiba
Riccardo Giacconi
Gerardus 't Hooft
Martinus J.G. Veltman
Jerome I. Friedman
Henry W. Kendall
Richard E. Taylor
Carlo Rubbia
Simon van der Meer
Subramanyan Chandrasekhar*
William Alfred Fowler
Kenneth G. Wilson
James Watson Cronin
Val Logsdon Fitch
Sheldon Lee Glashow
Abdus Salam *
Steven Weinberg
.
.
little fishes
.
.
layers of error thinking physics Re: 2-Comparative Analysis of failures of Logic with failures of Physics// one thinks 3 OR 2 =5 with 3 AND 2 = 1 while the other thinks proton to electron is 938MeV vs .5MeV when truly it is 840MeV to 105MeV

Physical Review Letters: Proton Mass
Yi-Bo Yang, Jian Liang, Yu-Jiang Bi, Ying Chen, Terrence Draper, Keh-Fei Liu, Zhaofeng Liu
more and more layers of error thinking physics
.
.
John Baez
Brian Greene
Lisa Randall
Alan H. Guth
Michael E. Brown
Konstantin Batygin
Ben Bullock
Larry Harson
Richard A. Muller, crank at Berkeley
Edward Witten

/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Boston?

Yes, what did they say-- the power of Sun and stars is not really fusion but is the Faraday Law inside of atoms creating monopoles and turning Space into energy that fuels the Sun and stars. My rough estimate is that fusion only supplies 10% or less of Sun and stars.

But of course, I could not have discovered the true starpower when under the silly idea that the electron was a mere .5MeV when it truly is 105 MeV.

In that manner, physics departments are racist physicists for the knowledge that Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840 MeV, and the .5MeV was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole is going on 2 years now in the public eye starting 2017, yet none of these physicists (these poor physicists lacking understanding of angular momentum has raised a single peep). The reason they keep their mouths shut, is because they are so poor in physics, they do not want to be embarrassed. These gentlemen and ladies are not physicists, for a real physicist would debate the issue, not hide from the issue. And real physicist would not discount a discovery because of the person-- Archimedes Plutonium who discovered it.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-25 21:52:41 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Such a gang of worthless failures of science,-- stalkers, James kibo Parry-Moroney, Dan Christensen, Jan Burse, Zelos Malum, qbwr, Jan Bielawski, Franz, Michael Moroney, Erik Eastside, Earle Jones, Konyberg, who gang up and attack posters 24-7-365. And have destroyed the newsgroups sci.physics, sci.math to the point their only function can be as a poster announcement with no chance of idea development in such a corrosive environment of marauding imps. Sad sad state of affairs that the Internet allows such a moron creep of James kibo Parry lord over sci.math and sci.physics, much like letting a 3 year old be a lifeguard at a swimming pool.

Both sci.physics and sci.math are overrun by attacking stalkers, stalkers in gangs, and the spam is probably generated from this same gang of stalkers as a technique to pushing posters they attack off the front page. Several of these gang members work for a small ISP company who have nothing better to do than gang up and attack, usually at night. Both sci.physics and sci.math have ceased being a platform to do any science, other than as a poster board. No-one can do any "normal science" in that environment, no-one can develop ideas in that environment. And the pay-off of getting an insight in science versus the time wasted on fighting the gang of jerks is not worth it. The only useful function for sci.math and sci.physics is announcement, and let the worthless jerks dance around the announcements.

To read what AP is currently doing-- Real Science-- you have to go to ---

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Very crude dot picture of 5f6 magnetosphere of 231Pu Atom Totality

A torus shape doing the Faraday Law inside of each and every atom.
   __
.-' `-.
.' ::\ ::|:: /:: `.
/ ::\::|::/:: \    inside the atom is rings of Faraday Law coil and bar magnet
;..........  _ _ ............ ;
|.......... ( ).............|
; - -    ;
\ ::/::|::\::    / neutrons form a atom-skin cover over the torus rings
   `. ::/ ::|:: \:: .'
   `- _____ .-'

One of those dots in the magnetosphere is the Milky Way galaxy. And
each dot represents another galaxy. The O is the Cosmic nucleus and
certainly not as dense as what Old Physics thought, and perhaps it is a void altogether
because in New Physics the interior of atoms has the Faraday law going on.

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Atom Totality Universe Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

Physics book that explains what the universe is, and how it works. This is a continuation of the Atomic Theory by Democritus in Ancient Greek times. It adds one more fact to the Atomic Theory. That the Universe itself is one gigantic big atom. It completes the logic of science that Dr. Feynman wrote-- all things are made up of atoms -- and so, to complete that idea -- all things and the universe itself is an atom.

Length: 616 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

File Size: 632 KB
Print Length: 616 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLP9NDR
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,903,481 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#6115 in Physics (Kindle Store)
#38566 in Physics (Books)
#74700 in Biological Sciences (Books)

True Chemistry Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.

Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2

Read less

Length: 1097 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $2.99 What's this?

File Size: 1948 KB
Print Length: 1097 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLVMMSZ
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,150,073 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#960 in General Chemistry & Reference
#7113 in Physics (Kindle Store)
#7705 in General Chemistry

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS (textbook in the making-- journal textbook): journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Geometry

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $9.99 to buy

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 328 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1968 KB
Print Length: 328 pages
Publication Date: May 2, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07RG7BVZW
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #274,398 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#27 in General Geometry
#336 in Geometry & Topology (Books)

AP's periodic journal of fakeries in science: Magazine of science and math fakes foisted on general public Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The world is tired of "peer reviewed science" masquerading as the truth of science, when it is often the case that peer reviewed is false and fake science, even anti-science, as entrenched pork barrel money machines that look more towards "money money money". Or the peer review of magazines and journals that also look more towards "money" as a promotion ladder for unscrupulous professors climbing a promotion ladder at the school they teach. Publish, publish, publish, but seldom truth truth truth.

April 2019 issue-- discusses black holes as pure science fiction fakeries for a world that has a Pauli Exclusion Principle PEP, is a world that cannot simultaneously have a black hole. Physicists just never learned any logic to know that science cannot hold a contradiction. All science laws breakdown the minute you accept contradictions. Either the world has PEP but no black holes, or, the world has both, still a contradiction. Cover picture is HD98800 which is two binary star pairs and looks better as a black hole than does the fake recent black hole photo.

May issue --discusses the unwillingness of scientists and mathematicians to accept true science such as the ellipse is never a conic even when given a High School proof the ellipse is not a conic. And psychology is discussed as to "hate-envy-motivation" of scientists that blocks their minds from accepting the truth of science.

June issue of 2019-- discusses why and what the fake "gravity waves" reports from LIGO; what those reports really mean and measure.

July issue-- as yet to be decided, for the world of fake science is a long list to chose from..

Editor in chief of this magazine journal, AP

File Size: 1755 KB
Print Length: 27 pages
Publication Date: April 28, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07R5Q2199
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

#1 New Releasein General Chemistry & Reference

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Read less

Length: 12 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Mat

Product details
File Size: 2207 KB
Print Length: 12 pages
Publication Date: April 10, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QKHRWG8
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #220,321 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#5 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#39 in General Chemistry & Reference
#381 in General Chemistry

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
• Be the first to review this item
•
•
•
•
•
• See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Read less

Length: 14 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled
Matchbook Price: $0.99 What's this?

File Size: 1629 KB
Print Length: 14 pages
Publication Date: April 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07QRPZQ4Q
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

 Would you like to tell us about a lower price?

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $5.00 to buy

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1224 KB
Print Length: 29 pages
Publication Date: March 14, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQTNHMY
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

File Size: 1620 KB
Print Length: 21 pages
Publication Date: March 11, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PLSDQWC
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

World's First Valid Proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem, 1993 & 2014 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $4.00 to buy

Real proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem// including the fake Euler proof in exp3 and Wiles fake proof

Recap summary: In 1993 I proved Fermat's Last Theorem with a pure algebra proof, arguing that because of the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4 that this special feature of a unique number 4, allows for there to exist solutions to A^2 + B^2 = C^2. That the number 4 is a basis vector allowing more solutions to exist in exponent 2. But since there is no number with N+N+N = N*N*N that exists, there cannot be a solution in exp3 and the same argument for higher exponents. In 2014, I went and proved Generalized FLT by using "condensed rectangles". Once I had proven Generalized, then Regular FLT comes out of that proof as a simple corollary. So I had two proofs of Regular FLT, pure algebra and a corollary from Generalized FLT. Then recently in 2019 I sought to find a pure algebra proof of Generalized FLT, and I believe I accomplished that also by showing solutions to Generalized FLT also come from the special number 4 where 2 + 2 = 2^2 = 2*2 = 4. Amazing how so much math comes from the specialness of 4, where I argue that a Vector Space of multiplication provides the Generalized FLT of A^x + B^y = C^z.

As for the Euler exponent 3 invalid proof and the Wiles invalid FLT, both are missing a proof of the case of all three A,B,C are evens (see in the text).

Length: 74 pages
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Page Flip: Enabled

File Size: 1445 KB
Print Length: 74 pages
Publication Date: March 12, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07PQKGW4M
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Not Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-26 01:44:02 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Michael Moroney james sickfuck kibo Parry wrote:
8:33 PM (8 minutes ago)

Re: Archimedes "Total Failure" Plutonium flunked the math test of a lifetime-generation test

Post by Michael Moroney
Subject: 1.5 Rik Chandler rates 1-5-Dr.Hau Harvard's "slowed light" tested for
laser light turned off-- if the beam vanishes instantly-- even in the BEC

Archie's slow motion autistic meltdown over getting a 1 star review is *still*
ongoing? Get well soon, Archie!

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-05-26 21:18:21 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Trump smarter in math than MIT & UC, Riverside Math departments, smarter in math than Terry Tao, Ed Witten, Dan Christensen, kibo Parry Moroney

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

Was the Saber-Toothed-Tiger, Smilodon, Paleontologists most laughable mistake? Kindle Edition by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)// I never knew Dan Christensen had two saber teeth

Post by Michael Moroney
I really think it is time for you to retire, Archie. Haven't you, ummmm... done enough aleady?
Dan

- hide quoted text -

Rik Chandler says modern day science is absolute trash// what is Science and Sentiment in the USA??

Rik Chandler
1.0 out of 5 starsAbsolute trash
May 4, 2019
Verified Purchase
This is an incomprehensible piece of garbage written by an anonymous person using an absurd pseudonym.

Was the Saber-Toothed-Tiger, Smilodon, Paleontologists most laughable mistake? Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

Was the Saber-Toothed-Tiger, Smilodon, Paleontologists most laughable mistake? Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Be the first to review this item

See all formats and editions
• Kindle
• $0.00    Read with Kindle Unlimited to also enjoy access to over 1 million more titles  $3.00 to buy

Ever since I was a teenager in High School, I was troubled with the saber-toothed tiger-- how evolution could have built such an animal. But I was not logical in mind as a teenager, and had to wait until now to let my logical mind survey that perplexing question. To an extraordinary claim in science-- huge teeth that an animal cannot cope with, requires extra-special evidence and proofs of science. How can evolution theory (even though it is a rule or algorithm) (see my Superdeterminism replaces Darwin Evolution book), how can evolution produce an animal with teeth that "get in the way of everything" as the animal goes through life. So, I am asking the science community to completely re-examine the fossil evidence of Smilodon. I do not have that evidence available, but the entire Paleontology community can make the evidence available. For what I suspect is that the tiger never had saber-teeth and that those teeth found in digs or tar pits, were the teeth of Entelodonts or some ungulate horn or walrus type animal teeth. In other words, I question the claim there ever existed a cat with huge canine teeth.

Cover Picture: What spurred me onto this small book was a few days ago seeing the cover of Science News showing a Saber-Toothed Tiger. And how utterly ridiculous for a tiger to have those teeth. And just as ridiculous that grown scientists believe such nonsense without questioning it.

Length: 16 pages
Word Wise: Enabled
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

File Size: 1681 KB
Print Length: 16 pages
Publication Date: March 30, 2019
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
Language: English
ASIN: B07Q7RLD4F
Text-to-Speech: Enabled
X-Ray:  Not Enabled  
Word Wise: Enabled
Lending: Enabled
Screen Reader: Supported
Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,822,656 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#218 in 30-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#278 in Paleontology (Kindle Store)
#1383 in Paleontology (Books)

Post by Michael Moroney
I really think it is time for you to retire,

Re: Trump smarter in math than MIT & UC, Riverside Math departments, smarter in math than Terry Tao, Ed Witten, Appel & Hakken
AP writes: at least our president Donald Trump has the good common sense, ( I believe Trump's uncle was at MIT, so there must be quite a bit of smarts in the family, but anyway Trump knows that a BORDER is essential to mark one country from another-- in the same fashion FINITE and INFINITY neither exists unless you have a border between them-- hence true calculus

AP writes: yes, appropriate that Christensen warns students that John Baez, Terry Tao, Ed Witten are so backwards that they still teach ellipse is a conic. And so very very stupid in mathematics for they never managed to ever get around doing a geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, how bozo is that????

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-06-28 19:06:18 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Math Minnow

AP writes: I do not think any of these people are autistic, although Dr. Randall is likely a minnow of physics with her crazy notions of a black hole wiping out the dinosaurs, and she never ever learned what Angular Momentum means

Moroney and Harvard fail at High School Math, fail at Angular Momentum// both think a proton is 938MeV with electron at .5MeV when truly they are 840MeV to 105MeV//both fail math with Ellipse never a conic and a geometry proof of Calculus

True Chemistry: Chemistry Series, book 1 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Physics and chemistry made a mistake in 1897 for they thought that J.J. Thomson's small particle of .5MeV was the electron of atoms. By 2017, Archimedes Plutonium discovered that the rest mass of 940 for neutron and proton was really 9 x 105MeV with a small sigma-error. Meaning that the real proton is 840MeV, real electron is 105 MeV= muon, and that little particle Thomson discovered was in fact the Dirac magnetic monopole. Dirac circa 1930s was looking for a magnetic monopole, and sadly, Dirac passed away before 2017, because if he had lived to 2017, he would have seen his long sought for magnetic monopole which is every where.

Cover picture: shows two of my chemical models, one of CO and the other CO2

Length: 1154 pages

Geometry of the Chemical Bond; metallic, covalent, ionic//Chemistry Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the second book of the Series -- True Chemistry. I left off of True Chemistry with trying to solve the Chemical bond when the proton and muon inside of each and every atom is doing the Faraday Law. And since that book was already 1154 pages long, I decided to start afresh in a second book devoted to solving the Geometry of the chemical bond of metallic, covalent and ionic.
Cover Picture: PHYSICS: Part 2: Extended Version: Halliday & Resnick, 1986, pages 654, 655 talking about Capacitors and my collection of some capacitors in my lab. The first one is a two prong wall plug taken apart to show what the prongs fasten onto when plugged-in (two parallel plates). The next three are spade and socket connectors (two parallel plates). Next is circular or hook plates, and last is a cylinder plate and socket.

Length: 35 pages

Plutonium Atom Totality Universe, Atom Totality Series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Cover picture: is what the interior and exterior of most atoms looks like once you apply Faraday's Law to subatomic particles.This picture is a coil of 88 rings torus with a smaller ring inside. The 88 coil rings represent 11 protons in a Faraday Law magnetic induction coil and the smaller ring is a muon as a bar magnet thrusting through the proton coil, thereby, producing electricity.

The goal and aim of the 8th edition of Atom Totality, 2017 was to iron out all the mathematics of Electricity and Magnetism so that the AP-Maxwell Equations embodied all the mathematics of physics. In other words, all of physics is handled by the AP-Maxwell Equations. But in the course of straightening out the EM math of physics, I made my second greatest science discovery-- that the real proton was 840MeV, real electron was the muon at 105MeV and that little particle we all thought was the electron since JJ Thompson discovered it in 1897, was in fact not the electron but was Dirac's magnetic monopole. I made that discovery in the midst of my writing the 8th edition (only goes to show that most of our best ideas come from organizing and placing our thoughts into order-- writing a book). And so this 9th edition goal and aim is to go back and fix the picture of atoms, their geometry, and incorporate that discovery, mostly by fixing the picture of what atoms exterior and interior geometry is, in light of the fact that there is the Faraday Law going on inside of atoms.

Length: 115 pages

TEACHING TRUE MATHEMATICS: journal-textbook for ages 5 to 18, Volume 1; and ages 19 to 26, Volume 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

This is the one textbook in two volumes that carries every person through all his/her math education needs, 5 year old to 26 year old through all of mathematics that is needed to do science. Every other math book is incidental to this one. And the student needs this math book for all their math and science needs. A one-size-fits-all for mathematics study.

I call it a journal-textbook because Amazon's Kindle offers me the ability to edit overnight, and to change the text, almost continuously. A unique first in education textbooks-- continual overnight editing.

What prompted me to write this textbook is that the Old Math is too much filled with error, mistakes and just sheer nonsense. In the early 2000s I wrote about 5 editions of Correcting Math textbooks and about 9 editions of True Calculus, but then I got so fed up and tired with all the mistakes of Old Math, that I decided the best route to go is throw out all of Old Math and start anew.

Now I wrestled with publishing a "rough first edition" now, or to wait about a year in polishing the textbook and then publish it. I wrestled with this and decided I have enough of a skeleton text, that I can continually polish with overnight editing, and that it would be of more benefit to readers to have this skeleton text and watch and wait as the months and years go by to see the continual polishing take affect. So I decided tonight to publish, for the benefit of many to see, rather than wait a year to see a polished text. I may have made a mistake in this decision for I do not want to turn off anyone to math. But maybe I made the correct decision to allow others to see this book a full year ahead of schedule. Bon Voyage!

Length: 361 pages

AP's periodic journal of fakeries in science: Magazine of science and math fakes foisted on general public Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The world is tired of "peer reviewed science" masquerading as the truth of science, when it is often the case that peer reviewed is false and fake science, even anti-science, as entrenched pork barrel money machines that look more towards "money money money". Or the peer review of magazines and journals that also look more towards "money" as a promotion ladder for unscrupulous professors climbing a promotion ladder at the school they teach. Publish, publish, publish, but seldom truth truth truth.

April 2019 issue-- discusses black holes as pure science fiction fakeries for a world that has a Pauli Exclusion Principle PEP, is a world that cannot simultaneously have a black hole. Physicists just never learned any logic to know that science cannot hold a contradiction. All science laws breakdown the minute you accept contradictions. Either the world has PEP but no black holes, or, the world has both, still a contradiction. Cover picture is HD98800 which is two binary star pairs and looks better as a black hole than does the fake recent black hole photo.

May issue --discusses the unwillingness of scientists and mathematicians to accept true science such as the ellipse is never a conic even when given a High School proof the ellipse is not a conic. And psychology is discussed as to "hate-envy-motivation" of scientists that blocks their minds from accepting the truth of science.

June issue of 2019-- discusses why and what the fake "gravity waves" reports from LIGO; what those reports really mean and measure.

July issue-- as yet to be decided, for the world of fake science is a long list to chose from..

Editor in chief of this magazine journal, AP

File Size: 1759 KB
Print Length: 31 pages

AP Atom Model replacing the Rutherford-Bohr Atom Model (Physics series for High School Book 1) Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

The Rutherford and Bohr model of the Atom is seen now as fake physics. And it will take a lot of time before that nonsense is removed and replaced in science textbooks and classrooms for a truer model of the Atom. So to accelerate that movement towards the truth of what the Atom is, I present this short book for High School. In the age of the Internet, when we discover true science but am teaching fake science, we need a process to quicken the exit of fake science. Not to wait around for 50 years to be teaching the true science, we should be teaching the true science as fast as possible and to remove the fake science in our school curriculums in a timely and orderly manner. So this small book is a pattern for future removal of fake science from school curriculums. This small book explains what the Rutherford-Bohr model was and why it was phony science. And I explain what replaces the Rutherford-Bohr model with the AP model of the Atom. So the pattern is -- show both -- and then authors of texts will eliminate the fake science until it is a passing footnote.

Cover Picture is a coil and a bar magnet and a galvanometer that measures the current produced as the bar magnet is thrust through the coil. This is Faraday's Law and needs to be taught in High School.

Length: 12 pages

How the Sun and Stars truly shine, not by fusion, but by Faraday's Law (Physics series for High School Book 2) Kindle Edition
• by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
 
One of my recent books (published a few days ago) was the AP model of the interior of atoms replacing the Rutherford-Bohr model of the atom. And the differences are vast between these two atom models, for the AP model has the Faraday law going on, with actual work and job for the subatomic particles. And in that Atom model book, I was complaining that our modern science education school system has no good way of ridding itself of fake science where we keep on teaching propaganda and fake science for as much as 50 years beyond the discovery of what the true underlying science actually is. I gave as an example the Wegener Continental Drift theory in geology, where students had to suffer 50 years of a fake static-earth-theory when the Continental Drift theory was all around. One of the reasons for the delay in teaching the truth of science, is there is so much money interests involved of people selling fake science textbooks. And this is where the Internet can come in and play a vital role in school education, because the Internet can publish books of "true science" and get them exposed to a world audience, and so fake science like the static-earth theory would have been gone long before 50 years had elapsed if the internet were present for Wegener.

But now an even bigger and more important theory of science and physics is here and threatens to throw out as fake science the fusion theory of star energy, especially since it is "How the Sun shines". In effect, the question is, how do all stars shine? What is their energy source. And hard to believe that this topic in current science education with their explanation as "being fusion" is fake science. We all know what the answer is from present day science-- that stars and sun shine because of fusion. That they fuse hydrogen and light elements to make heavier elements like helium and in that fusion they give off energy which is sunshine. But is it true? Is that true science. You would be surprised to find out, that such is not the truth of how stars and Sun shine. They do not shine because of fusion. They shine because the Faraday law is going on inside each and every atom in that star or the Sun.

Now, here is another science teaching that needs to replace the fake science of fusion for the Sun and stars. And it should not take 50 years like Wegener's continental drift to push out the fake static earth theory. We should not have to wait 50 years for our teachers to teach the truth about how the stars and Sun shine with energy. And so, here again, just as in the previous book "AP's model of the Atom", I present the old theory of how stars shine and alongside that old fake theory, I present the new true theory. And in that presentation, we can give the entire science education community, give them about say 5 years of time in which to completely remove the old fake theory that fusion causes stars and Sun to shine with energy. When in fact, the truth is, Faraday Law causes stars and the Sun to shine.

Cover Picture is my photograph of a Google search on my computer of Sun images.

Length: 14 pages

World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math where they had a ill-defined infinity; they had the fakery of Limit concept; and they had the fakery of a continuum.

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus basically says the integral is inverse to the derivative and the derivative is inverse to the integral. By inverse is meant that you can go to one given the other and vice versa, such as add is the inverse of subtract, so if we had 10 + 4 = 14 then the inverse is subtract 4 and we have 14-4 = 10 back to 10 where we started from. And the geometry proof involves a rectangle and a right triangle hinged atop a trapezoid. You hinge it one direction you have dy*dx for area of a rectangle for integral area. You hinge it the other direction you have the dy/dx for slope or derivative from the trapezoid formed.

Sad that Old Math was so full of ill-defined concepts and fake concepts that never was a geometry proof of FTC ever possible in Old Math.

Length: 29 pages

AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

Ever since Ancient Greek Times it was thought the slant cut into a cone is the ellipse. That was false. For the slant cut in every cone is a Oval, never an Ellipse. This book is a proof that the slant cut is a oval, never the ellipse. A slant cut into the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.

Length: 21 pages

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-08-14 04:05:40 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Dung Beetle of Math and StableFly of Physics

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-08-14 20:25:04 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Dung Beetle of Math and StableFly of Physics

AP writes: I bet kibo Parry Moroney is not brave enough to say that directly to Sheldon Glashow's face that he missed the entire boat of physics when he thought the electron of atoms is a mere .5MeV

Michael Moroney

2019-08-14 20:32:20 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Subject: Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach
percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
AP writes: I bet kibo Parry Moroney is not brave enough to say that directly to Sheldon Glashow's face that he missed the entire boat of physics when he thought the electron of atoms is a mere .5MeV

Now why would either Kibo or I do something as dumb and stoopid as to lie to him
like that, even on a dare?

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-08-19 19:19:55 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic
Leech of Math and Lamprey of Physics

AP writes: kibo Parry Moroney is wrong on all accounts, for Dr. Larry Summers is a high quality person, and I enjoyed watching him tell of the economic situation of the USA

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-01-23 20:35:01 UTC

Michael Moroney
10:41 AM (3 hours ago)

- show quoted text -
OK, Archie, help us clear this up, once and for all.
Since you are the self-proclaimed expert on Logic, can you walk us through
this logic? Perhaps we're missing something obvious.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.
Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?
Quoting
Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages
Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---
3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.
4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---
5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.
6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.
7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.
8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.
9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.
10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.
But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.
11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.
But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.
And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.
But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.
Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.
So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.
So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.
Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.
So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.
12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon
Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.
Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.
New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.
Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.
New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.
How is that a proof the electron = muon?
Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.
Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.
In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.
Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.
For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs
/\
O
Where the leafs start out as ||
Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.
Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()
by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Michael Moroney

2018-01-23 22:21:41 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
OK, Archie, help us clear this up, once and for all.
Since you are the self-proclaimed expert on Logic, can you walk us through
this logic? Perhaps we're missing something obvious.

Why not answer the question rather than follow it up with the 12 Failures
of Plutonium again?

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-04 08:38:27 UTC

Alzheimer

AP writes: The Moroney Stalker SONG

SONG( played with a light rapp and reggae music beat)

Stalk, stalk stalk Moroney, crock, crock, crock

Moroney has a feeble mind-brain
Your conic cut is just insane
For a slant cut in cone is an oval
Your moron brain is a joke-offal
You failed the ellipse, and too stupid for the plane
For you are just simply totally insane

Why you stalk, stalk stalk, you
worthless crock crock crock
Not even an ellipse, can you do
The oval is the conic cut
but you are so dumb and stupid too
Your entire head is up your crock

Moroney, so dumb in physics evermore
the kook thinks electron is .5MeV, mass
the goon thinks proton is 938MeV, mass
why does he keep his head up his ass
For the real proton is 840MeV rest mass

The real electron is the muon would'n you know
And it is 105 MeV rest mass, hello hello
Moroney, still with his head up his ass
The .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole
Yes, at last, .5MeV rest mass
But there is Moroney, still, with head up his ass
Stalk, stalk,stalk, worthless Moroney crock crock

Then there is the negative numbers foolery
Which the Moroney is a subscribed buffoonery
Touting negative here, negative there
Yet no negative number exists anywhere.

Then there is the way the Sun and stars shine
Moroney has his head in brine
The oaf thinks the stars and Sun shine from fusion
When in truth, they shine electro magnetic no confusion
Faraday law, but the Moroney is a failure bent on crime

Yes the Sun and stars shine from Faraday law
Inside each and every atom of a star
The Faraday law produces magnetic monopoles
Not by fusion does a star shine, no no no
People who believe in fusion have a head full of holes

Moroney thinks Boole logic is great
With its 5 OR 3 equalling 8
Even a village idiot knows 5 AND 3 is 8
What can you expect from Moroney borne
A dime sized brain and a day late

Moroney, Christensen, Burse cabal
Model their minds after the Boole pitfall
They love contradiction of Either..Or..Or..Both
Is that why they are all three such a screwball
But the true story of Boole needs be told after-all

The story of Boole needs be told
For western civilization logic was sold
Boole went to school in a downpour rain
Not carrying a umbrella and not changing clothes
Taught his class in a freezing shivering cold

Of course the students were all laughing at this Boole clown
From whence Boole caught pneumonia and frowned
You would think Boole had a logical mind
But no, he insisted his wife make him more cold
By cold bathes and wet the bed in cold drown

Of course Boole would not pneumonia survive
But his foolish logic of 3 OR 2 equals five , thrives
Would carry on and fill books for Education
Parasites like Christensen, Burse, Moroney,
Jan Bielawski, Eastside to teach phony lies.

Shame that Western Civilization bases its logic on pinheads
Instead of sound reasoning, but what can be said
Is that education in schools these days is more concerned
About money flow of textbooks teaching fakery that it be
Then about the real truth of the world where 2 AND 1 is 3

AP

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-01 22:17:58 UTC

Larry Summers, of Boston, please call off that barking dog Michael Moroney, an insane stalker for 24 years, never any physics, never any math, only bully hatred

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all
by Archimedes Plutonium
12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall
PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.
Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?
Quoting
Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages
Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---
3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.
4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---
5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.
6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.
7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.
8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.
9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.
10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.
But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.
11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.
But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.
And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.
But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.
Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.
So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.
So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.
Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.
So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.
12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon
Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.
Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.
New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.
Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.
New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.
How is that a proof the electron = muon?
Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.
Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.
In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.
Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.
For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs
/\
O
Where the leafs start out as ||
Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.
Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()
by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin

Michael Moroney writes:

11:16 AM (4 hours ago)

Meanwhile, Nature continues to ignore your nonsense,

Michael Moroney writes

11:05 AM (4 hours ago)

So cute. Archie is pretending that he is a teacher. Or rather, Archie is
pretending he is teaching a teacher.

That sounds so much like little kids playing school. "Amy, you be the

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-02 01:10:52 UTC

Dr Larry Summers is this some sort of Boston weakness that Moroney has-- thinks 938 MeV is 12% of 945MeV

Larry, i am sure all economists can do percentage correctly.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-12 02:00:33 UTC

Nope. I really did those experiments in high school. Maybe the high school
you went to wasn't much more than a glorified babysitting service, but I
went to a very good high school. We did many hands-on physics and
chemistry experiments, some of which I remember fondly.

You've had enough of yourself???
Sorry, no lie. I don't remember the exact value I got, but it was pretty
close to the ~9.1E-31 kg. And I got an "A" for the two experiments.

We report here a simple Compton scattering experiment which may be carried
out in graduate and undergraduate laboratories to determine the rest mass
energy of the electron. In the present experiment, we have ...

Compton scattering is another way to measure the electron's mass,
but it's not the one we did.

To measure the electron's charge, we did the Millikan Oil Drop Experiment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment
You measure the charge on several different droplets and look for a value
where all the measured values seem to be multiples of. This is the
quantized charge of an electron.
The apparatus is rather simple. A light box with a microscope eyepiece,
electrode plates for generating an electric field (oops, Archie doesn't
believe in an electric field, so he's well on the way of failing the
experiment!) and a bulb to spray a fine oil into it which forms tiny
droplets, some of which receive a small static charge. Varying the
nonexistent electric field caused the droplets to move, or remain steady
against gravity.
The charge-to-mass apparatus is also simple. It's basically a modified
oscilloscope CRT and associated electronics, a dime a dozen at the time.
You apply a voltage to the oscilloscope deflection plates, which generates
an electric field (oops! Archie will fail this experiment, too!) which
deflects the electron beam.
Another real cool one was actually measuring the decay of an isotope with
a very short half-life. The physics teacher had this 5 gallon jug of a
thorium compound solution, which he said will last him many years. It also
contained all the daughter elements in thorium's decay chain. He poured
some out, added some other chemical and then poured the result through
filter papers, which got handed out. We monitored the counts with geiger
counters. Supposedly, one element, a thorium decay daughter, was retained
on the filter paper, while the thorium and everything else passed through.
We had to monitor and write down the geiger counter counts every minute or
so, and graph it, and determine the half-life. The substance had a
half-life of about 10 minutes, easily observable through one class period.
That was fun!
They don't dare do that experiment these days. I have to wonder if/when
the state hazmat crew showed up at my old high school with all the workers
in moon suits, evacuating the school, and using a remote controlled robot
to take the jug to a lead-lined trailer to take it to a nuclear waste dump
with a police escort... :-)
The physics teacher did say the radioactivity was minimal and was no risk.
No risk by 1970s standards, anyway...

AP writes:
Does anyone believe that a failure an idiot who can not even do Percentages correctly, does anyone believe such a crum can weigh the electron.

And worse, Moroney sometimes blurted out that he was some engineer there in Boston.

Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all
by Archimedes Plutonium
12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall
PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.
Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?
Quoting
Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages
Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---
3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.
4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---
5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.
6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.
7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.
8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.
9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.
10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.
But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.
11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.
But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.
And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.
But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.
Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.
So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.
So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.
Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.
So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.
12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon
Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.
Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.
New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.
Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.
New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.
How is that a proof the electron = muon?
Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.
Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.
In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.
Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.
For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs
/\
O
Where the leafs start out as ||
Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.
Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()
by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-12 23:52:37 UTC

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

yeah by selling me
By ***@__.__ 1 post 0 views updated 4:59 PM

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-13 07:58:30 UTC

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Michael Moroney writes:
12:38 AM (1 hour ago)

No, no, Archie.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-13 18:27:26 UTC

9:13 ***@__.__
i was never really laughing in 1999 i was projecting

AP writes:
Spammer asks why not look for the 840 MeV proton in a muon beam

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-14 07:34:06 UTC

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Michael Moroney writes

Feb 13 (2 hours ago)

Are you on drugs or something? First you snip my post, specifically

Michael Moroney

2018-02-14 14:33:20 UTC

Autistic Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com> babbles:

<snip yet another repost of the "12 Failures of Plutonium">

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Michael Moroney writes
Feb 13 (2 hours ago)
Are you on drugs or something? First you snip my post, specifically
snipping the part where I mention Google not caring about your abuse,
and then you come up with something about cruelty and MIT?

Why do you humiliate yourself by posting made-up crap like turning a
stadium into a particle accelerator?

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-14 22:33:53 UTC

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 8:33:25 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:

Eh, Moron Moroney what percentage short is 940 MeV from 945MeV, and redeem yourself of the claim you are an engineer.

Michael Moroney

2018-02-15 03:02:48 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Eh, Moron Moroney what percentage short is 940 MeV from 945MeV,

Those don't sound like very useful numbers. (what, you are having trouble
looking up the mssses of the proton or muon? FAIL!) You may find the
numbers 951 and 938 slightly more useful. The difference is almost 13
MeV, which is about 12% the mass of a muon too heavy.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
and redeem yourself of the claim you are an engineer.

What? What will my coworkers do without me? My degree comes in so useful
for understanding how absurd your more absurd claims are!

Sine waves are really semicircles? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
No i (sqrt(-1))? That's OK, we EE's use 'j' instead.
No electric field? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
8.88 is "exactly" 9??? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Fe+3 more massive than a neutral Fe atom? HAHAHAHHA!!!!
.511 MeV particle a magnetic monopole yet div[B] = 0? HAHAHAHAHA!!!
A test tube full of H+ ????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Oh by the way, you need to redeem yourself of the claim you are some
scientist or mathematician, and embrace what you really are, a net kO0k.
Not as if everyone else doesn't know that...you'll be the last one to
figure that out...

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-15 21:12:15 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Those don't sound like very useful numbers.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-16 18:53:47 UTC

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Try this one if any easier for you--
percentage for Moroney, 938 is what percent short of 945

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-22 23:15:23 UTC

wearing only a T-shirt and sandals...
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all
by Archimedes Plutonium
12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall
PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.
Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?
Quoting
Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages
Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---
3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.
4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---
5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.
6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.
7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.
8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.
9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.
10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.
But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.
11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.
But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.
And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.
But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.
Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.
So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.
So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.
Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.
So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.
12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon
Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.
Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.
New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.
Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.
New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.
How is that a proof the electron = muon?
Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.
Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.
In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.
Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.
For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs
/\
O
Where the leafs start out as ||
Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.
Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()
by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-02-23 21:38:13 UTC

Michael Moroney wrote:
11:20 AM (4 hours ago)

Re: Larry, is it true Harvard has a Boole day, like Moroney says? Re: Harvard's Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole

Stoopid Plutonium. Explained in another post. No wonder dumb Boole

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-03-02 05:00:54 UTC

Michael Moroney wrote:
10:05 PM (46 minutes ago)

None of them are about to believe anything that is stated to be true just
because you said so. "Because I said so" is not science.
Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.

AP writes:: Dr. Larry Summers of Harvard, is Moroney saying that the reason Boston never wins Nobel in Economics is because Boston never learns how to do percentages correctly?

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all
by Archimedes Plutonium
12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall
PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.
Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?
Quoting
Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages
Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---
3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.
4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---
5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.
6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.
7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.
8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.
9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.
10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.
But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.
11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.
But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.
And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.
But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.
Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.
So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.
So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.
Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.
So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.
12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon
Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.
Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.
New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.
Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.
New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.
How is that a proof the electron = muon?
Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.
Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.
In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.
Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.
For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs
/\
O
Where the leafs start out as ||
Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.
Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()
by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-03-04 22:58:52 UTC

Michael Moroney writes:
9:01 AM (7 hours ago)

Sorry, there is no such thing as "my thread" on Usenet. Porat has just
as much right to babble his nonsense here

Besides, what's the difference between Porat babbling nonsense about
'circlons' and 'chains of orbitals'

AP writes:: What is the difference between Larry Summers or Lisa Randall or Sheldon Glashow who can do a correct percentage and a Moroney who cannot?

percentage for Moroney, 938 is what percent short of 945

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Michael Moroney

2018-03-05 01:38:24 UTC

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
9:01 AM (7 hours ago)

Stay out of all my threads, you miserable rotten creep

Sorry, there is no such thing as "my thread" on Usenet. Porat has just
as much right to babble his nonsense here as you do to babble your

nonsense here. You post something, expect a response.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Besides, what's the difference between Porat babbling nonsense about
'circlons' and 'chains of orbitals' and Archimedes Plutonium babbling

nonsense about 'electron=muon' and 'cosmic plutonium atoms'????
Other than the fact Plutonium is a much better speller?

So tell us, Archie, do you believe you have the right to babble nonsense
here but Porat doesn't have the same right to babble nonsense? If so,
why?

<snip full blown stalking autism attack with the "12 Failures">

Oh dear, poor Archie seems to be cycling back and forth, sometimes restraining
his autism, but sometimes letting loose with hundreds of lines of failures.
I hope he can get it under control some day.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-03-05 02:21:58 UTC

True Chemistry-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, Dirac's magnetic monopole = .5MeV

#1page

Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 13:32:28 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Chemists are smarter than Physicists-- 2018 textbook of Experiment--
Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, Dirac's magnetic monopole = .5MeV
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 21:32:28 +0000

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all

Experimental PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium

PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon

1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

#2page

Newsgroups: sci.physics
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:12:00 -0800 (PST)

Subject: radioactive Beta decay is 105 not .5 MeV Re: Chemists are smarter than
Physicists-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV, Real
Proton = 840MeV, Dirac's magnetic monopole = .5MeV
From: Archimedes Plutonium <***@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 23:12:00 +0000

radioactive Beta decay is it 105MeV or .5 MeV Re: Chemists are smarter than Physicists-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, Dirac's magnetic monopole = .5MeV

Chemists are smarter than Physicists-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, Dirac's magnetic monopole = .5MeV

So logically incoherent have Physicists become, so incoherent. Incoherent is a polite term for crazy, for physicists have become babbling crazy fools.

They would have you believe that Beta decay in Radioactivity is the decay of electrons as .5 MeV particles.

So, do the babbling crazy fools ever consider that if Electrons = .5MeV, then a current in a wire is Radioactive Decay. Give me any 10 outstanding physicists today, any 10, and, even all put together have not one gram of Logical thought among them.

If you think the electron is the .5MeV particle, then your radioactive decay is all messed up and screwy.

If you think the Real Electron = 105 MeV, then, you have a modicum of a logical mind, because when the Real Electron = 105 MeV, it seldom ever comes out of its parent-atom. It seldom comes out unless you apply high energy to the atom to force it apart from its 840 MeV proton. Thus, when you have a neutral atom and force that atom to emit or eject a 105 MeV particle, then, then, you have Radioactive Beta Decay.

But, the run of the mill photon with .5MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy, is not any Radioactive Decay.

I am going to have to rewrite the entire textbook on Radioactive Decay.

AP

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

#3page

On Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 1:08:56 AM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote in sci.physics:

#3page direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle Re: True Chemistry-- 2018 textbook of Experiment-- Real Electron = 105MeV, Real Proton = 840MeV, Dirac's magnetic monopole = .5MeV
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.

Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?

Quoting

Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages

Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---

Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu

::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .

http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/  whole entire Universe is just one big atom  where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.

Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.

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

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all
by Archimedes Plutonium
12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium
Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall
PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.
2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.
Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?
Quoting
Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages
Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---
3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.
4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---
5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.
6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.
7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.
8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.
9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.
10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.
But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.
11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---
So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.
But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.
And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.
But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.
Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.
So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.
So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.
Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.
So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.
12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon
Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.
Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.
New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.
Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.
New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.
How is that a proof the electron = muon?
Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.
Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.
In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.
Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.
For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs
/\
O
Where the leafs start out as ||
Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.
Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()
by Archimedes Plutonium
------------------
-------------------

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-04-15 06:42:17 UTC

Michael Moroney writes the definitive physics and math entrance exam for both Harvard and MIT
1:06 AM (19 minutes ago)

[X] Archie responds to criticism but is unable to discuss the issue...
[X] ...with Archie's response posted in the wrong topic...
[ ] ...and to the wrong newsgroup...
[X] ...multiple times...
[X] ...enough times to be classified as spam...
[X] ...in a topic/topics explicitly created by him for doing so...
[ ] ...and Archie even whines about (other) spammers in his spam...
[X] ...and Archie added zero new content...
[X] ...Giggle Groups screenshot cut and pasted...
[X] ...with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test never taken...
[X] ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
[X] ...who are university math or physics professors...
[ ] ...at a university supposedly near the person criticizing Archie...
[ ] ...but Archie got the location (and university) completely wrong...
[ ] ...and Archie demands they resign for not teaching his broken math...
[ ] ...and he includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors...
[X] ...and STILL can't answer 'why stalker lists of uninvolved profs'...
[ ] ...and Archie's actual response is completely unrelated to the topic...
[ ] ...and the critic's comment has embarrassing (to AP) portion removed...
[ ] ...to the extent the comment is no longer recognizable...
[ ] ...includes random snippets by other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...which are attributed to yet other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...followed by yet another repost of the "12 Failures of Plutonium"...
[ ] ...or the "you gotta draw pictures of calculus" repost...
[ ] ...and includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing...
[ ] ...as well as ascii art of Archie's butthole...
[ ] ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s...
[ ] ...and Archie brings up a "mistake" (in his view) from months ago...
[ ] ...which, of course, is not actually a mistake...
[ ] ...and Archie invents yet more "mistakes" (that are not mistakes)...
[ ] ...and Archie really wears out the "a beer short of a 6 pack" joke...

[ ] ...but he still doesn't realize he's about 5 beers short...
[ ] ...and Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages...
[X] ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said.
Palmjob Paddle Award:
[ ] Did You Catch The Hidden Message Behind Lady G Outfit Last Night?'s mushroom-slathered meatpole
[ ] Jim McGinn weather report
[ ] Steve Carroll's Darwinian Finch
[ ] just for fun I plotted Harvard vs. MIT in Boston Marathon Predicts that
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
I███████████████████].
◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...

[ ] Another boatload of shat arrives in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
[ ] Pug One's a BIG DUMB GOOF
[ ] THE HEART OF %
[ ] Boycotting Snit in all of its forms

AP writes: No questions on the fact the REal Proton is 840MeV, REal Electron is 105MeV and .5MeV particle was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole? Troubling test.

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Michael Moroney

2018-04-15 17:09:24 UTC

I missed how Archie mutiple posted his reply, upping his lameness score.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Moroney and Shein writing

Shein? Never met the man.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
tests for Boston

I don't even live in Boston.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Michael Moroney writes the definitive physics and math entrance
exam for both Harvard and MIT
1:06 AM (19 minutes ago)

No, I just measure the lameness and predictability of Plutonium posts.

=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88 ]=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=
=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=84=E2=96=83=20

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
=E2=96=82=E2=96=84=E2=96=85=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=

=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=85=E2=96=84=E2=96=83=E2=96=82=20

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
I=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=

=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=
=96=88=E2=96=88=E2=96=88].=20

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
=E2=97=A5=E2=8A=99=E2=96=B2=E2=8A=99=E2=96=B2=E2=8A=99=E2=96=B2=E2=8A=99=E2=

=96=B2=E2=8A=99=E2=96=B2=E2=8A=99=E2=96=B2=E2=8A=99=E2=97=A4...=20

ahh, I see. Archie doesn't like the crude ascii checkboxes.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: No questions on the fact the REal Proton is 840MeV, REal
Electron is 105MeV and .5MeV particle was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole?

<snip crap>

So here goes: New Improved Plutonium Lameness Checklist.

=E2=98=90 Archie responds to criticism but is unable to discuss the issue...
=E2=98=91 ...with Archie's response posted in the wrong topic...
=E2=98=91 ...and to the wrong newsgroup...
=E2=98=91 ...multiple times...
=E2=98=90 ...enough times to be classified as spam...
=E2=98=91 ...in a topic/topics explicitly created by him for doing so...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie even whines about (other) spammers in his spam...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie added zero new content...
=E2=98=91 ...Giggle Groups screenshot cut and pasted...
=E2=98=91 ...with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test no one ever took...
=E2=98=91 ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
=E2=98=91 ...who are university math or physics professors...
=E2=98=91 ...at a university supposedly near the person criticizing Archie...
=E2=98=91 ...but Archie got the location (and university) completely wrong...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie demands they resign for not teaching his broken math...
=E2=98=91 ...and he includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors...
=E2=98=91 ...and STILL can't answer 'why stalker lists of uninvolved profs'...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie's actual response is completely unrelated to the topic...
=E2=98=91 ...and the critic's comment has embarrassing (to AP) portion removed...
=E2=98=91 ...to the extent the comment is no longer recognizable...
=E2=98=91 ...includes random snippets by other critics, spammers or babblers...
=E2=98=90 ...which are attributed to yet other critics, spammers or babblers...
=E2=98=91 ...followed by yet another repost of the "12 Failures of Plutonium"...
=E2=98=90 ...or the "you gotta draw pictures of calculus" repost...
=E2=98=91 ...and includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing...
=E2=98=90 ...as well as ascii art of Archie's butthole...
=E2=98=91 ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s...
=E2=98=91 ...and Archie brings up a "mistake" (in his view) from months ago...
=E2=98=91 ...which, of course, is not actually a mistake...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie invents yet more "mistakes" (that are not mistakes)...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie really wears out the "a beer short of a 6 pack" joke...
=E2=98=90 ...but he still doesn't realize he's about 5 beers short...
=E2=98=90 ...and Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages...
=E2=98=91 ...and Archie is envious that I weighed the electron and he didn't...
=E2=98=91 ...Archie asks Google Groups to something they can't do...
=E2=98=91 ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said.

Archimedes Plutonium Lameness score: 23!

Michael Moroney

2018-04-15 17:13:43 UTC

I missed how Archie mutiple posted his reply, upping his lameness score.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Moroney and Shein writing

Shein? Never met the man.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
tests for Boston

I don't even live in Boston.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Michael Moroney writes the definitive physics and math entrance
exam for both Harvard and MIT
1:06 AM (19 minutes ago)

No, I just measure the lameness and predictability of Plutonium posts.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
Nomen Nescio
4:46 PM (3 hours ago)
[ ] Did You Catch The Hidden Message Behind Lady G Outfit Last Night?'s mushroom-slathered meatpole
[ ] Jim McGinn weather report
[ ] Steve Carroll's Darwinian Finch
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
I███████████████████].
◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...

ahh, I see. Archie doesn't like the crude ascii checkboxes.

Post by Archimedes Plutonium
AP writes: No questions on the fact the REal Proton is 840MeV, REal
Electron is 105MeV and .5MeV particle was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole?

<snip crap>

So here goes: New Improved Plutonium Lameness Checklist.

☐ Archie responds to criticism but is unable to discuss the issue...
☑ ...with Archie's response posted in the wrong topic...
☑ ...and to the wrong newsgroup...
☑ ...multiple times...
☐ ...enough times to be classified as spam...
☑ ...in a topic/topics explicitly created by him for doing so...
☐ ...and Archie even whines about (other) spammers in his spam...
☐ ...and Archie added zero new content...
☑ ...Giggle Groups screenshot cut and pasted...
☑ ...with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test no one ever took...
☑ ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
☑ ...who are university math or physics professors...
☑ ...at a university supposedly near the person criticizing Archie...
☑ ...but Archie got the location (and university) completely wrong...
☐ ...and Archie demands they resign for not teaching his broken math...
☑ ...and he includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors...
☑ ...and STILL can't answer 'why stalker lists of uninvolved profs'...
☐ ...and Archie's actual response is completely unrelated to the topic...
☑ ...and the critic's comment has embarrassing (to AP) portion removed...
☑ ...to the extent the comment is no longer recognizable...
☑ ...includes random snippets by other critics, spammers or babblers...
☐ ...which are attributed to yet other critics, spammers or babblers...
☑ ...followed by yet another repost of the "12 Failures of Plutonium"...
☐ ...or the "you gotta draw pictures of calculus" repost...
☑ ...and includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing...
☐ ...as well as ascii art of Archie's butthole...
☑ ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s...
☑ ...and Archie brings up a "mistake" (in his view) from months ago...
☑ ...which, of course, is not actually a mistake...
☐ ...and Archie invents yet more "mistakes" (that are not mistakes)...
☐ ...and Archie really wears out the "a beer short of a 6 pack" joke...
☐ ...but he still doesn't realize he's about 5 beers short...
☐ ...and Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages...
☑ ...and Archie is envious that I weighed the electron and he didn't...
☑ ...Archie asks Google Groups to something they can't do...
☑ ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said.

Archimedes Plutonium Lameness score: 23!

Archimedes Plutonium

2018-04-15 06:51:12 UTC

Moroney and Shein writing tests for Boston Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole

Michael Moroney writes the definitive physics and math entrance exam for both Harvard and MIT
1:06 AM (19 minutes ago)

[X] Archie responds to criticism but is unable to discuss the issue...
[X] ...with Archie's response posted in the wrong topic...
[ ] ...and to the wrong newsgroup...
[X] ...multiple times...
[X] ...enough times to be classified as spam...
[X] ...in a topic/topics explicitly created by him for doing so...
[ ] ...and Archie even whines about (other) spammers in his spam...
[X] ...and Archie added zero new content...
[X] ...Giggle Groups screenshot cut and pasted...
[X] ...with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test never taken...
[X] ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
[X] ...who are university math or physics professors...
[ ] ...at a university supposedly near the person criticizing Archie...
[ ] ...but Archie got the location (and university) completely wrong...
[ ] ...and Archie demands they resign for not teaching his broken math...
[ ] ...and he includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors...
[X] ...and STILL can't answer 'why stalker lists of uninvolved profs'...
[ ] ...and Archie's actual response is completely unrelated to the topic...
[ ] ...and the critic's comment has embarrassing (to AP) portion removed...
[ ] ...to the extent the comment is no longer recognizable...
[ ] ...includes random snippets by other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...which are attributed to yet other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...followed by yet another repost of the "12 Failures of Plutonium"...
[ ] ...or the "you gotta draw pictures of calculus" repost...
[ ] ...and includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing...
[ ] ...as well as ascii art of Archie's butthole...
[ ] ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s...
[ ] ...and Archie brings up a "mistake" (in his view) from months ago...
[ ] ...which, of course, is not actually a mistake...
[ ] ...and Archie invents yet more "mistakes" (that are not mistakes)...
[ ] ...and Archie really wears out the "a beer short of a 6 pack" joke...

[ ] ...but he still doesn't realize he's about 5 beers short...
[ ] ...and Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages...
[X] ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said.

Nomen Nescio
4:46 PM (3 hours ago)

Palmjob Paddle Award:
[ ] Did You Catch The Hidden Message Behind Lady G Outfit Last Night?'s mushroom-slathered meatpole
[ ] Jim McGinn weather report
[ ] Steve Carroll's Darwinian Finch

███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
I███████████████████].
◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...

[ ] Another boatload of shat arrives in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
[ ] Pug One's a BIG DUMB GOOF
[ ] THE HEART OF %
[ ] Boycotting Snit in all of its forms

AP writes: No questions on the fact the REal Proton is 840MeV, REal Electron is 105MeV and .5MeV particle was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole? Troubling test.
- hide quoted text -

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-02-19 07:51:47 UTC

Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
31 posts by 3 authors

me (Archimedes Plutonium change)
1/23/18

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole, after all

by Archimedes Plutonium

12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall

PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon

1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy.

2nd proof with the direct observance some years back in Poland of a 840 Mev particle along with 105 MeV particle of the hydrogen atom.

Hello, well i found the below on the internet. I need a 840MeV particle that is the Real Proton. I have asked to look for it in the production of Muons. Is the below a production of muons along with 840 MeV particles?

Quoting

Indication For A Broad J(pc) = 2++ Meson At 840-mev Produced In The Reaction Pi- P ---> Pi+ Pi- N At High |t|
K. Rybicki, I. Sakrejda (Cracow, INP)
1985 - 10 pages

Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 65-74
DOI: 10.1007/BF01550250
Abstract (Springer)
The reaction π−p→π+π−n has been studied at 17.2 GeV/c and 63 GeV/c. A partial wave analysis shows a fairly broad (∼250 MeV) resonance at about 840 MeV. This object, already visible in moments of the angular distribution, is produced in theD wave with helicitym=2 via unnatural exchange. The cross section for the reaction π−p→D2U(840)n is only by an order of magnitude lower than that of ϱ(770) and falls likepLAB−2.1±0.3. We have not been able to explain this object by systematic experimental effects like acceptance and/orN* reflections; neither is the nature of the resonance (if real) clear to us.
--- end quote ---

3rd proof-- pull plug out of electrical socket and notice light flash. That flash of light was the magnetic monopoles as photons with charge energy of .5MeV, for the monopoles compose all electric currents.

4th proof is that the radius of the hydrogen proton shrinks too much when a muon is injected and that contradicts Standard Model. The reason is obvious-- the proton is 840 MeV electron is muon and then you add a second muon.

--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---

So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.

--- end Quote ---

5th proof electrochemical battery is not explainable as Faraday law unless you concede the battery is a thrusting bar magnet, and thus, the battery is explained as a dipole magnet of the anode and cathode and the electrolyte solution is the ferromagnetism of spins all lined up. And thus a current in the circuit is because the battery as a thrusting magnet forces monopoles down the circuit wire.

6th proof, spin is charge, and charge is spin and the only particle for that is a ratio of permittivity to permeability as that of 10^-6/ 10^-12 is a charge energy of 10^6 or 1 MeV for photon charge energy, and that leaves the proton, electron=muon, monopole with .5MeV charge energy.

7th proof the Maxwell Equations are not symmetrical without current being the flow of magnetic monopoles.

8th proof, now, a straightforward proof that the muon is the real-electron can come from ion theory. The trouble is that weeding out a proof of electron = muon, is that we get entangled with the magnetic monopole. So, the proof is simple for ion theory, to prove the muon = real electron. Take for example iron Fe atoms, they are 26 protons, 26 electrons=muons
Now iron has ion states of -4, -2, -1, +1, +2, +3, +4, +5 +6, +7
So, suppose the electron = .5MeV particle and not the 105 MeV particle
That would mean Iron can exist as iron with 26 protons and only 19 electrons at one extreme and 26 protons and 30 electrons at the other extreme.
Now in Maxwell theory, there is a law that enforces Conservation of Energy, called the Lenz law in Faraday law. Otherwise, you have unlimited energy and Nature does not have unlimited energy.
So that in atoms, the protons become a thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= real-electrons are the closed loop of wire (inert gases are closed loop wires and why bonding exists is to close the loop of real-electron structure).
So, the proof that .5MeV are not electrons, is that iron bonds readily with other iron forming a compound of iron, the metal iron and metallic bond is due to iron atoms wanting to close the loop of their 26 Real Electrons. They close that loop by the metallic bond. That means, the existence of ions from -4 to +7 is unrelated altogether from Electron configuration. That ions are some other particle behavior but not the electron nor proton behavior.
The reason iron exists as iron from Fe-4 to Fe+7 is that the particle .5MeV is a surface interloper particle of atoms, it is a add-on particle not the integral electron of atoms. If the monopole were the electron we break conservation of energy by all these interlopers. The reason the chemical table is all built around the inert gases, is because Faraday's law must be obeyed and thus atoms with a closed loop of their electrons seek no bonding of electrons= muons. But atoms that have no closed loop of their muons, seek that closed loop structure and thus, they form covalent, ionic, metallic bonds with other muons of other atoms.

9th Proof. In Chemistry, it is rare, that a atom loses or gains any Real-Electron=muon.
And that is a 9th proof that Real Electron=muon, that beta decay in Old Physics, was not the electron of atoms but the transfer of Magnetic Monopoles.
The only real radioactive decay mode is the helium nucleus-- alpha decay
But there is never a Real Electron decay for that would mean muons spewed out of atoms. Nor do we see protons spewed out of atoms, Real Proton = 840 MeV. The so called hydrogen nucleus of a 938 MeV is not radioactive decay, for it is still a 840 proton + 105 muon = hydrogen atom.

10th Proof. Well, I spoke of the internal heart or core of the concept of Chemistry, that the proton/s and electron/s are two parts of the Faraday Law. The protons are the thrusting bar magnet and the electrons= muons forms the closed loop of wire. Essentially that is the heart and core of atomic physics, a replay of Faraday's law with protons and electrons.

But, however, the electrons= muons only forms a closed loop wire for Faraday's law in the inert gases, the helium, neon, argon, etc and all other atoms want to have that closed loop configuration. Thus, is borne the Chemistry of bonding. Chemistry is borne. So that one atom without a closed loop configuration bonds with another atom to achieve that goal. So chemistry bonding is that of muons bonded to other muons in different atoms.

Now, can these .5 MeV particles fulfill the atoms need to make their muons a closed loop? Obviously not, because ions of atoms such as Fe, iron, swing from -4 to +7 in ions, so that proves ions cannot solve a atom's problem of its electron structure being less than closed loop. Only muons of other atoms can fulfill a atom's need to be closed loop.

11th Proof. Solving the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly, alongside proton radius shrunk
--- Quoting from www, Ars Technica, Researchers orbit a muon around an atom, confirm physics is broken ---

So, the proton radius puzzle remains a puzzle. The team behind this new work point to a number of measurements that could potentially help clarify it. Some of them involve better measurements with normal electrons; others involve scattering muons off protons themselves to see if there's an unknown force at work. The latter would tell us whether anything beyond the Standard Model will be needed to explain this puzzle.
--- end Quote ---

Now in re-reading that Ars article on proton radius shrinking when a hydrogen atom of 840 MeV proton with electron = 105 MeV and then a second muon is tried to be compounded-- will of course, shrink the proton radius for the two muons with 1 proton all three are centered at the center of the proton.

But in re-reading was mentioned an anomaly I was not familiar with-- Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly.

And reading some results of that, I find surprizing for it was Feynman who claimed Electrodynamics was the supreme physics theory in accuracy of prediction.

But the anomaly is off by a mere .1%, which seems very very small to be not even an anomaly. Trouble is, the electron of Old Physics was found to be so accurate as to be described as physic's most precise finding ever, and that makes the .1% discrepancy ever so much larger.

Now, I was able to explain away the proton radius anomaly because the proton is not 938 MeV but is 840 MeV and the electron is not the .5MeV particle but rather is 105 MeV.

So, can I explain away the Muon Magnetic Moment Anomaly. I believe I can easily. For if you consider that what Old Physics measured as the electron magnetic moment was none other than the monopole as a dressed up photon magnetic moment. And it is easily seen that in EM theory the permeability constant is "exact" no uncertainty at 1.26*10^-6 H/m.

So, it is no wonder that Old Physics thought their electron magnetic moment in Quantum Electrodynamics was so ultra ultra precise-- for, they never measured the magnetic moment of the electron, but instead a magnetic monopole of the dressed up .5 MeV particle.

Then, when it came time to measure the magnetic moment of the muon, the real-true-electron, there is this .1% discrepancy, but there are discrepancies in the proton and neutron etc.

So, once we realized the Real Electron is the muon, afterall, there is no magnetic moment anomaly.

12th proof -- Static Electricity Re: Proofs that the Real Electron=muon

Alright, I need a 12th proof, for I do not want to neglect what is probably our first encounter with electricity-- static electricity. As we walk across a carpet and touch something we experience a spark. Trouble with static electricity, is that the concept makes out the atom as a flimsy structure, really really flimsy structure that electrons of atoms can be picked off so easily, and from very many diverse materials. One would think the structure of atoms was built of stronger stuff. And that is what the Electron = Muon concept is about, that it is so very very hard to separate a electron from its atom, just like separating a proton out of a nucleus. So the subject of static electricity is this interloper particle, this surface superficial particle that is easily "whipped up" as the magnetic monopole, just as easy as producing electricity in a Faraday Law demonstration of a thrusting bar magnet in closed loop of wire. For, we can easily imagine that our walk across a carpet is similar to a thrusting bar magnet and then the closed loop wire is when we touch something, having built up some monopoles in our body.

Old Physics would say that we picked up electrons on the carpet, and as we touch something, remit that imbalance of electrons.

New Physics would say that we picked up magnetic monopoles.

Now let us look at other static electric experiments. For when we rub a glass rod (+1) with silk, or rub a plastic rod (-1) with wool. Here again, Old Physics would say we pick off electrons of atoms.

New Physics would say, no, the atoms are still composed of all their electrons and protons. The only thing changed with the rubbing is that energy of the rub transfers to the magnetic monopole energy-- packets of .5MeV monopoles of charge energy. And the energy of rubbing becomes monopoles. These are those closed Lines of Force of a magnet, and the moment we touch something these stored up monopoles, flow from our body to that of the touched object.

How is that a proof the electron = muon?

Simple, in that the carpet, or plastic rod (-1) with wool or glass rod (+1) with silk, are materials that are electrically neutral substances, for the rubbing action was transformed not into free electrons, but was formed into monopoles. These substances remain electrically neutral, and the only change is that the rub created magnetic monopoles-- some + charged monopoles, some - charged monopoles, and these monopoles are superficial to the atoms where they formed.

Static Electricity is merely stored monopoles. Monopoles are conservation of energy, for the rubbing had to be transformed into some energy packets and that is-- monopoles of charge energy.

In the experiment of where we pick up bits of paper from either the glass rod or the plastic rod due to static electricity. What is happening here, is that the rod is not involved with the Real Electrons of atoms, but is involved with the superficial surface charged particle that is the magnetic monopole.

Now the electroscope is explained much much easier with magnetic monopoles rather than the silly electrons on one leaf pushing away the electrons on the second leaf.

For consider instead a closed loop line of force between the two leafs

/\
O

Where the leafs start out as ||

Then comes the charged rod of monopoles sending down a monopole closed loop O that pushes apart the two leafs.

Now i have two gold leafs and if true should leave the push apart looking more like this () rather than this /\. And that is what i have ()

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

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

Michael Moroney

2019-02-19 16:12:13 UTC

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

Again?? Plutonium failed all over the place again! Who has been feeding
Plutonium Taco Bell Extra Beany Burritos laced with Ex-Lax?? Stop it!

12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon
by Archimedes Plutonium

It's back!! The 12 Failures of Plutonium!! 12 claims the electron is the
short-lived muon, and every single one of them is wrong! How could
Plutonium fail so much?

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-02-19 23:32:12 UTC

The ascii art butthole is still open!
Math Failure

AP writes: I never left Harvard, MIT, Yale with the impression the place was a butthole like Moroney, but sadly, education institutes are filled with hatemongers like Moroney

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-02-21 22:58:01 UTC

Math Failure

Jim Rohr, are you a physics failure of CMU? vs. Daniela L. Rus,Farnum Jahanian,Jeremy Avigad,CMU are you like Moroney too stupid to learn proton is _not_ 938MeV electron .5MeV when they are 840MeV, 105MeV for chemistry bonding//Either..Or..Or..Both

Jim Rohr chairman Carnegie Mellon University are you a physics failure and is Moroney post certified CMU post?

AP writes: Hi Jim, just wondering if your Moroney stalker posts are CMU certified, for I am worried these days over certification, ever since Apple tells me my cables have to be Apple certified and not the cheaper $5. knock down in price cable.

Feb 19Michael Moroney writes:
Physics failure

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-02-22 20:38:36 UTC

Carnegie Mellon Univ. chairman Jim Rohr Re: .. flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Math Failure

AP writes: Carnegie Mellon Univ chairman Jim Rohr, I do not care if Moroney calls you a math failure, what I do care about is whether CMU has certified Moroney's post, just as Apple requires certification of its cables to iphones

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-02-22 22:18:10 UTC

Jim Rohr chairman Carnegie Mellon, James Garrett provost, flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Math Failure

AP writes: Jim Rohr chairman Carnegie Mellon, James Garrett provost, I do not care if Moroney thinks Dr. Summers is or is not a math failure, what I am concerned about is whether Moroney posts using Carnegie Mellon are certified posts

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-23 17:44:28 UTC

Oh no! It's another ascii art butthole!

AP writes: I would not talk about Carnegie Mellon like that, even though they never learned real electron is the muon

Jim Rohr chairman Carnegie Mellon, James Garrett provost, flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Math Failure

Michael Moroney

2019-03-23 18:00:54 UTC

AP writes: 26 years of posts of Moroney and all they amount to is the above,

Hey, you're the one who after 26 years is posting ascii art buttholes!

no wonder Harvard kicked out Moroney as a moron tramp

You're projecting again, Dartmouth College fired your ass for posting
stupid crap like your Plutonium Atom Stupidity under their name!

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-02-22 06:25:36 UTC

21 Feb Michael Moroney wrote:
10:27 PM (45 minutes ago)

Re: biology is rife with chickenshit

AP writes: Dr Larry Summers, is Moroney's post certified by Carnegie Mellon Univ, as it passes through their pathway

Moroney and Shein writing tests for Boston Re: Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly??-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
Michael Moroney writes the definitive physics and math entrance exam for both Harvard and MIT
1:06 AM (19 minutes ago)
[X] Archie responds to criticism but is unable to discuss the issue...
[X] ...with Archie's response posted in the wrong topic...
[ ] ...and to the wrong newsgroup...
[X] ...multiple times...
[X] ...enough times to be classified as spam...
[X] ...in a topic/topics explicitly created by him for doing so...
[ ] ...and Archie even whines about (other) spammers in his spam...
[X] ...and Archie added zero new content...
[X] ...Giggle Groups screenshot cut and pasted...
[X] ...with a subject about flunking a nonexistent test never taken...
[X] ...and the subject mentions totally uninvolved people...
[X] ...who are university math or physics professors...
[ ] ...at a university supposedly near the person criticizing Archie...
[ ] ...but Archie got the location (and university) completely wrong...
[ ] ...and Archie demands they resign for not teaching his broken math...
[ ] ...and he includes a stalker list of physics and/or math professors...
[X] ...and STILL can't answer 'why stalker lists of uninvolved profs'...
[ ] ...and Archie's actual response is completely unrelated to the topic...
[ ] ...and the critic's comment has embarrassing (to AP) portion removed...
[ ] ...to the extent the comment is no longer recognizable...
[ ] ...includes random snippets by other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...which are attributed to yet other critics, spammers or babblers...
[ ] ...followed by yet another repost of the "12 Failures of Plutonium"...
[ ] ...or the "you gotta draw pictures of calculus" repost...
[ ] ...and includes the dumb ascii art cat/owl thing...
[ ] ...as well as ascii art of Archie's butthole...
[ ] ...and Archie doesn't realize ascii art is so 1980s...
[ ] ...and Archie brings up a "mistake" (in his view) from months ago...
[ ] ...which, of course, is not actually a mistake...
[ ] ...and Archie invents yet more "mistakes" (that are not mistakes)...
[ ] ...and Archie really wears out the "a beer short of a 6 pack" joke...
[ ] ...but he still doesn't realize he's about 5 beers short...
[ ] ...and Archie can't get over the shame of messing up percentages...
[X] ...Google Groups poster. 'Nuf said.
Nomen Nescio
4:46 PM (3 hours ago)
[ ] Did You Catch The Hidden Message Behind Lady G Outfit Last Night?'s mushroom-slathered meatpole
[ ] Jim McGinn weather report
[ ] Steve Carroll's Darwinian Finch
███۞███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▃
▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂
I███████████████████].
◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤...
[ ] Another boatload of shat arrives in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
[ ] Pug One's a BIG DUMB GOOF
[ ] THE HEART OF %
[ ] Boycotting Snit in all of its forms
AP writes: No questions on the fact the REal Proton is 840MeV, REal Electron is 105MeV and .5MeV particle was Dirac's Magnetic Monopole? Troubling test.
- hide quoted text -

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

Moroney is a Boston poster who says he weighed the electron in High School and went on to get a degree in engineering but how is this possible when he is so dumb and cannot even do a percentage correctly?
Michael Moroney is not only a failure of math, --must have have been burnt out at school-- but also an insane crank on sci.math, sci.physics for 24 years now. I have often asked Google to please engineer a delete key so original authors of a thread can develop their own thread without these insane stalking poopers pooping up (Moroney a 24 year stalker). Let original authors delete any post in their thread which is unfit. Let insane stalkers make their own threads so they can crap all they wish without interrupting those doing serious science.
MAKE sci.math a Level Playing field, and stop tilting sci.math in favor of moron stalkers.
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
President Larry Summers
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
Harvard Math dept
Noam Elkies (FP)
Dennis Gaitsgory (FP)
Robin Gottlieb (PP)
Benedict Gross (FP)
Joseph Harris (FP)
Heisuke Hironaka (EM)
Michael Hopkins (FP)
Arthur Jaffe (FP)
David Kazhdan (EM)
Mark Kisin (FP)
Peter Kronheimer (FP)
Jacob Lurie (FP)
Eric Maskin (FP)
Barry Mazur (FP)
Curtis McMullen (FP)
David Mumford (EM)
Martin Nowak (FP)
Gerald Sacks (EM)
Wilfried Schmid (FP)
Yum-Tong Siu (FP)
Shlomo Sternberg (EM)
John Tate (EM)
Cliff Taubes (FP)
Hugh Woodin (FP)
Horng-Tzer Yau (FP)
Shing-Tung Yau (FP)
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Harvard?
And, even though you-- professors of math/physics, want to remain stupid in Real Electron/Calculus, your students deserve better.

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-05 04:16:24 UTC

Alzheimer

Michael Moroney

2019-03-25 23:21:42 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
AlzheimerPlutonium
AutisticPlutonium

AP writes: make up your mind you insane moron that belongs in a asylum, not sci.math.

You have both, Failure Plutonium! I guess your Alzheimer's made you forget
that already!

x-no-archive: yes

Archimedes Plutonium

2019-03-26 17:37:51 UTC

Post by Michael Moroney
Autistic

AP writes: why does the criminal stalker Moroney want to hold back all science by their belief in the .5MeV was the electron when the muon is the true electron of each atom and the proton is 840MeV. Stalkers are so insane they need locking up

Michael Moroney

2019-08-15 22:00:39 UTC