Remarkable my 238th book of science for AP // Proving the Principle of Maximum Electricity Production is done by Atoms 44m views
7m views
238th book of science for AP // Proving the Principle of Maximum Electricity Production is done by Atoms
44m views
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 18, 2023, 10:02:09 AM
So many times I have referred to this principle in my work. Yet I never proved it true. I think it is
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 18, 2023, 11:21:39 PM
Alright I need some math data to understand why Maximum Electricity production relates directly to
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 18, 2023, 11:42:18 PM
Now looking at the unique features of the Torus. Source StackExchange: The torus is the only surface
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 19, 2023, 2:38:02 PM
Now the speed of measured Alpha particles from decay is in the range of 5 to 7 percent the speed of
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 19, 2023, 11:51:08 PM
Recently I caught myself writing a trio of books in astronomy, starting with the concept of Stepping
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Mar 20, 2023, 2:27:00 AM
Alright, I think I have the proof that the torus is the geometry figure of Maximum Electricity
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 23, 2023, 2:14:10 PM (8 days ago)
Alright, onto my 238th book of science. I have often mentioned this principle in my physics work.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 23, 2023, 5:06:17 PM (8 days ago)
I suspect the Maximum Electricity Principle is the reverse of Least Action or Least Energy principle,
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 27, 2023, 11:27:21 PM (4 days ago)
I need a full book on Maximum Electricity Production Principle in order to say the S, P, D, F
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 28, 2023, 9:24:25 AM (3 days ago)
I am going to try for 2 different methods of proof of Maximum Electricity Production. One method is
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 28, 2023, 12:06:03 PM (3 days ago)
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:23:19 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > I am going to try for
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 28, 2023, 9:32:30 PM (3 days ago)
Alright, I am not going to have any problems with figuring out the geometry inside of Atoms, for I
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 28, 2023, 11:20:05 PM (3 days ago)
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 9:30:14 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > Alright, I am not
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 29, 2023, 5:57:07 AM (3 days ago)
On Friday, April 28, 2023 at 11:19:34 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > On Friday, April 28,
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 29, 2023, 4:09:32 PM (2 days ago)
Now this total overhaul of the geometry of the interior of all Atoms is going to make me say that the
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 29, 2023, 11:57:22 PM (2 days ago)
On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 5:56:34 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > Copper is 1s-2, 2s-
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 30, 2023, 1:14:04 AM (2 days ago)
Now here I have to stop for a moment and worry and wonder of a factor in efficiency. The worry is
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 30, 2023, 8:54:33 AM (yesterday)
So I ask the question again is there a mathematics easy way of computing that 50 for copper, rather
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 30, 2023, 3:25:25 PM (yesterday)
So I am intrigued here because I am making the case that photons and neutrinos from dipoles. That a
Message has been deleted
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 30, 2023, 8:20:27 PM (yesterday)
Alright this leads directly into the idea that the composition of the Proton as a 840MeV torus and
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Apr 30, 2023, 11:33:15 PM (yesterday)
On Sunday, April 30, 2023 at 8:16:55 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > Alright this leads
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 7:39:22 AM (yesterday)
Alright, this is becoming extremely interesting. I have the world divided between either a Transverse
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 1:07:26 PM (19 hours ago)
I am looking on how to recover a Semicircle wave in the manner that a cycloid wave is constructed.
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 1:48:32 PM (18 hours ago)
Alright, some good signs in all of this mess. I am looking for rolling of closed curves that recovers
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 2:00:38 PM (18 hours ago)
Now looking at the Limacon, if we stipulate that the offcenter point has to always be as a
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 7:28:19 PM (12 hours ago)
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 1:02:23 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > I am looking on how to
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 9:53:05 PM (10 hours ago)
So, well, Wikipedia has a animation of a Limacon and the Convex Limacon is almost a circle but a part
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 10:57:40 PM (9 hours ago)
Now I am going to go contrary to the description of the Dimpled Limacon and say that the Pointer-
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
May 1, 2023, 11:23:28 PM (8 hours ago)
Now I am pretty sure this is a flaw in Old Math Geometry of their Limacon pointer marker going around
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<
plutonium....@gmail.com>
7:45 AM (now)
to Plutonium Atom Universe
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:23:28 PM UTC-5 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
Now I am pretty sure this is a flaw in Old Math Geometry of their Limacon pointer marker going around like a clock as the motion of the moving circle goes around. The AP Limacon is where the pointer marker needs to stay perpendicular to the tangent of
the stationary circle, thus creating a new larger circle with one intersection point. I say this because there is no other mechanical means of producing concentric circles or intersection at one point of two circles.
It is understandable that people would be interested in the 2-motions of Old Math Limacon, the motion of rolling one circle over another circle, but also the motion of the Pointer-Marker, for the Limacon of Old Math is obfuscating but yields figures for
Art and Artwork, but not figures for Physics of electricity and magnetism.
In Physics we are more precise than goonclods of Old Math with their double motions. In New Math we have only one motion, the rolling of one circle over another. Or the rolling of 1 ellipse over another and producing a new circle-- once the mess up of
the motion of the pointer-marker is corrected.
In New Math, in rolling figures we allow only one motion. And we Well-Define the Pointer Marker as not having motion and has a Infinitesimal length of at least 1*10^-604 distance length. And this Pointer Marker must be perpendicular at all times to the
rolled-over tangent of stationary figure. So in the MathStackExchange figure of ellipse rolling over identical ellipse, it actually is a Circle once the Pointer Marker mistakes are corrected.
Now it took me all of just 2 minutes today to get a sheet of tracing paper and trace out the cycloid on page 293 of Jacobs "Mathematics: A Human Endeavor". And then roll my second cycloid over the perimeter of Jacobs cycloid. Using the pointed tip (not
the center of second cycloid but the pointed tip as Pointer-Marker. Now keeping the pointed tip always with its length as a perpendicular to the tangent of the stationary cycloid what that rolling traces out is indeed a Semicircle.
So here we can start some Conjectures:
Conjecture 1, rolling a ellipse over a identical ellipse, keeping pointer-marker perpendicular produces a circle.
Conjecture 2, rolling a circle over another circle keeping pointer-marker perpendicular produces a circle.
Conjecture 3, rolling a cycloid over identical cycloid, keeping pointer-marker perpendicular produces a semicircle.
Physics needs the **perpendicular** for the pointer-marker, for electricity is always perpendicular to magnetism.
The Old Math Geometry Limacon is actually 2 rollings, the rolling of one circle over another and the independent rolling of a pointer marker. In the AP Limacon, there is but one rolling the circle over the other circle, while the pointer-marker is a
fixed perpendicular point.
Old Math Geometry of its roulette math and Limacon are ill-defined in their pointer-marker and theirs is mostly math for Art work, not physics electricity and magnetism.
This messy obfuscation of what is moving also can solve the two identical ellipses rolling one over the other as tracing out a perfect circle. It is almost producing a perfect circle in the MathStackExchange animation but slightly off. And I am saying it
is only slightly off because the animation was not programmed to allow the pointer marker, the center of the rolling ellipse to always have a perpendicular to the tangent of the stationary ellipse. You see the programmers of that animation, are like the
Limacon animation and not restricting the pointer-marker to be always a perpendicular, and that is the reason it is not a perfect circle. This means having the pointer marker be a tiny tiny length, the infinitesimal of mathematics, a length of 1*10^-604,
a small positive number and length that needs to stay perpendicular to stationary figure surface tangent.
Now I need to do the same thing with the cycloid, see if I can roll one cycloid over a stationary cycloid with a pointer-marker and see if I trace out a semicircle. I may have to use the midpoint of the line segment that connects the two ends of one
cycloid wavelength.
Wrong I need just the pointed tip ends, either one will do as a pointer-marker. By tip end I am speaking of the letter C if that were a cycloid seen sideways, has two tip ends.
Yes, in geometry if you are not in the habit of first doing a problem with hand cut outs and seeing for yourself the outcome, then you are not doing geometry correctly. Those that think they can apply algebra without seeing a hand on demonstration are
doing just kook math geometry.
AP, King of Science, especially physics and logic
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
3:09 PM (3 hours ago)
to
Alright, good on MathStackExchange for they have something on cycloid rolling. Titled "Cycloid rolls on another identical Cycloid" 6years-4months ago. They have a animation and the figure it traces is looking like half a stadium geometry shape. However,
they use as Point-Marker the center of the straightline segment of the cycloid. And I suspect they do not keep their point-marker always at a perpendicular to the surface of stationary cycloid. If they keep their point-marker perpendicular to tangent of
surface, I suspect it becomes a semi-ellipse rather than half a stadium.
What AP uses as Point-Marker is either one of the corners and keeping this point-marker perpendicular, I trace out a Semicircle.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
5:56 PM (1 hour ago)
to
Major, major Geometry in Motion discovery by Archimedes Plutonium. I discovered this in this writing of 238th book. The discovery I made is that the cycloid Wave is an Ellipse wave. The error of Old Math Geometry is that they had 2 motions in a rolling
circle on the straightline. They had the motion of the circle which is wanted, but they also had a 360 degree motion of the Pointer-Marker on the surface of the rolling circle. What this causes is the end product of a cycloid with 2 vertices if we put
half and half together.
When we stipulate only one motion and not two motions, and when we stipulate the Point-marker is always perpendicular to the surface of straightline, that the Point-Marker is actually a infinitesimal distance length that is constantly perpendicular to
the straightline, that the final curve is a ellipse and has no vertices.
A cycloid with vertices is actually a fiction geometry produced by a circle in motion.
This chimes back to one of my conjectures a long time ago, that the only smooth curve produced by circle rolling is either ellipses or circles. There is a quantization of smooth curves as produced by conic sections and so the Old Math Geometry of Motion
Geometry erred in motion by a ill-defined notion of the Point-Marker, and that this Point-Marker is ill-defined in Old Math and it has a silly stupid motion itself.
This is a huge major discovery for Geometry in Motion for it directly impacts Physics electromagnetism.
The cycloid curve of Old Math is a error filled fictional curve. Much like the slant cut of right-circular cone is a Oval, never the ellipse, and the oval broadly defined is the adding of two different ellipses to form a oval. Still within the AP
conjecture-- the only smooth curves in geometry (have no vertices) are New Math conic sections.
This deserves a separate math book for it is a huge major change in Geometry of Motion.
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
6:16 PM (18 minutes ago)
to
Now I have a easy intuitive proof that I am correct the cycloid is actually a ellipse. Some geometers call this a synthetic proof where we argue a simple insight. In this case we focus upon the midpoint of the cycloid wave-- 1 cusp. This midpoint is
rather flat and it is flat because the Pointer-Marker is parallel to the straightline it is rolling upon. That means the points on both sides of the midpoint are also parallel and thus a straightline ridge. Now for AP's Pointer Marker that is always
perpendicular to straightline causes the midpoint ridge of cyloid to be higher than the points to the right and left of the midpoint ridge. This is the description of the ellipse. While the cycloid with its flat ridge actually is not a smooth curve at
the ridge but contains vertices as it transits from straight line ridge to being a curve again. This constitutes a Proof that Cycloids are actually Ellipses. And also I need to show that at the ends of the cycloid cusp that those angles are different in
the AP cycloid than the ill-defined Old Math cycloid.
This is again, a huge major discovery, not so much for Mathematics which used this stuff for Art and Art Work, but for Quantum Electrodynamics, for EM of physics is all about Particle and Wave, and the cycloid is the particle of the rolling circle upon
the straightline which is the wave of Physics. The Faraday law of a Torus being the Proton is all about geometry of smooth curves. And geometry is basic and fundamental to physics.
On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 5:59:55 PM UTC-5 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: Major, major Geometry in Motion discovery by Archimedes Plutonium. I discovered this in this writing of 238th book. The discovery I made is that the cycloid Wave is an Ellipse wave. The error of Old Math Geometry is that they had 2 motions in a rolling
circle on the straightline. They had the motion of the circle which is wanted, but they also had a 360 degree motion of the Pointer-Marker on the surface of the rolling circle. What this causes is the end product of a cycloid with 2 vertices if we put
half and half together.
When we stipulate only one motion and not two motions, and when we stipulate the Point-marker is always perpendicular to the surface of straightline, that the Point-Marker is actually a infinitesimal distance length that is constantly perpendicular to
the straightline, that the final curve is a ellipse and has no vertices.
A cycloid with vertices is actually a fiction geometry produced by a circle with two motions.
This chimes back to one of my conjectures a long time ago, that the only smooth curves produced by circle rolling is either ellipses or circles or New Math conic sections. There is a quantization of smooth curves as produced by conic sections and so the
Old Math Geometry of Motion Geometry erred in motion by a ill-defined notion of the Point-Marker, and that this Point-Marker is ill-defined in Old Math and it has a silly stupid motion itself.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)