• On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 10:55:02 PM UTC-6, Moroney (Kibo Parry

    From Archimedes Plutonium@21:1/5 to Volney on Tue Jul 25 23:34:19 2023
    Kibo Parry review of his corpse fucking:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:31:44 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
    "physics hater"


    Kibo on his corpse fucking, that is Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, sci.math 30 year stalker defiler and demonizer

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:23:59 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
    "physics hater"

    Re: 2- Why Canada's Dan Christensen does not denounce his friends necrophilia-- Kibo,Zelos, Chris Thomasson "I want to fuck her corpse". Apparently Dan is woven from the same clothe.
    by Jeffrey Rubard Jan 29, 2023, 6:39 PM

    Can_Dr.Robert Sica,Dr.Arthur B.McDonald, Dr.Els Peeters Queen's,Uni Western Ontario -please--step into their Canadian physics or chemistry lab and weigh the mass of Electrolysis Water, proving Water is H4O not H2O. AP's homegrown lab cannot do the fine
    tuning experiment of weighing a test tube of electrolyzed hydrogen and oxygen from water. If AP is correct Water is really H4O, not H2O. My weighing scale is puny and insufficient for the job at hand, 0.00001 gram or less of hydrogen and oxygen test
    tubes. If AP is correct the hydrogen is 1/4 the weight of oxygen, if mainstream chemistry, physics is correct the hydrogen is 1/8 in amu to oxygen.

    On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 7:42:42 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
    STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of
    On Thursday, July 20, 2023 at 3:41:49 PM UTC-5, Jeffrey Rubard wrote:
    "What if... this actually wasn't that clever?"

    On Friday, July 21, 2023 at 4:23:49 PM UTC-5, Jeffrey Rubard wrote:
    Re: Wolfgang Mueckenheim fuck my ass!
    On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 9:03:40 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote: >"Putin's Stooge"
    They're not OK.
    "They're you."
    Oh no, I'm 'speculating' about some other person who was victim of some other happenstance.
    "Obstruction of justice in the second person"

    Spam mill echo chamber, that is Rubard, WM along with his gay spamletts a decades long spammer of sci.math, yet he fails math. Is it that Gottingen cannot understand the slant cut in single cone is an Oval, never the ellipse, or is it the foolish
    Boole logic they teach of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction? Or is it that neither WM or Gottingen can do a geometry proof Fundamental Theorem of Calculus? Which is it W. Mueckenheim?? You spammer crank.

    The endless and worthless Spam Mill Echo Chamber of Wolfgang Mueckenheim with his gay entourage.

    Could WM loudmouth step into the Gottingen Univ physics or chemistry lab and weigh the mass of Electrolysis Water, or is he only good for loudmouth nonsense of airhead complaints of calculus, along with his nonsense that slant cut of cone is
    ellipse, when in truth that is a oval.

    +Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within

    On Monday, January 18, 2010 at 11:30:47 AM UTC-6, John Baez wrote:
    Also available at http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week290.html

    Surely Gottingen and UCR have weighing scales better than 0.00001 gram.

    Surely Durban Univ. has excellent weighing scales.

    Eram semper recta (John Gabriel) profile photo
    Eram semper
    ,...
    Jim Burns
    775
    20Jul2023
    WM Logic


    +Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within

    3m views Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium


    Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.


    Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium

    In Old Chemistry and Old Physics, their subatomic particles were do nothing and no function and no job particles that sit around as balls or whiz around the outside of balls doing nothing but pointless circling.

    In New Physics and New Chemistry-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism. Every subatomic particle has a job a function a purpose as to the Laws of Electromagnetism--- Faraday law, Coulomb law, Ampere law, Capacitor law.

    A proton is a torus of 840MeV with 840 windings, while the muon is the true electron of Atoms and is encased inside the proton torus thrusting through and producing electricity-- magnetic monopoles.

    The neutron of Atoms is a parallel plate capacitor storing the electricity of proton+muon and is skin cover on the outside of the proton torus in the form of parallel plates.

    Can hydrogen be a Atom if it is just a proton+muon? No, all atoms require to have a capacitor such as at least one neutron. Thus the Hydrogen Atom is H2 where you have 2 proton+muon where 1 of the 2 proton+muon acts like a neutron to the other
    proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.

    AP is waiting for experimental chemists and physicists to prove him correct that Water is H4O.

    In the meantime we have Hydroxyl which in Old Chemistry, especially Biology is OH, while AP says that is wrong and that is really H2O.

    Now glycerine is a hydroxyl with formula C3H8O3. And what I am thinking at this moment, is that hydroxyls will be an easier proof that Water is truly H4O, rather than wait for experimentalists to actually "weigh the electrolysis test tubes of
    oxygen and hydrogen".

    You see, with H4O as water, glycerine is C3(2 waters)O with an extra oxygen. If Water is H2O then glycerine is C3(4 waters) deficit O. It is missing an oxygen if water is H2O.

    The reason glycerine is so effective as a skin ointment is because it has glycerine, the extra O oxygen. If water were H2O, then glycerine would be a missing oxygen and not a skin lotion that works, but makes skin even more dry.

    Proving Water is H4O, not H2O, and where hydroxyl is H2O// AP's 250th book TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY, by Archimedes Plutonium

    Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
    12:24 AM (13 hours ago)



    to Plutonium Atom Universe

    --- quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---
    Perhaps there is only two Faraday laws on Electrolysis. I am looking at the one that states: Faraday's first law of electrolysis relates the mass of a substance liberated (or deposited) at an electrode to the electric charge used (Q). A
    proportionality constant Z can be used:

    m = ZQ = (E/96485)(Q)

    m = mass, Q = total charge rewritten as Q = I*t amperes x time in seconds.

    This website gives an example: 5amps passed through molten Sodium Chloride for 3 hours. Calculate the mass of Sodium. E=23/1.

    m = (23/96485) (5) (3*60*60) approx 12.87 grams.

    --- end quoting in part from source-- Study.com ---

    Now has such a experiment been performed on Water to see how much atomic mass of hydrogen and of oxygen results??? If AP is correct, the formula of water is H4O, if Old Physics, Old Chemistry is correct the formula is H2O. So which is it???

    AP


    No, sorry no, Faraday's Law of Electrolysis is not going to tell the correct mass of hydrogen.

    Reading Wikipedia on Faraday's Electrolysis law.

    --- quoting Wikipedia ---
    A monovalent ion requires 1 electron for discharge, a divalent ion requires 2 electrons for discharge and so on. Thus, if x electrons flow,
    x/v atoms are discharged.

    So the mass m discharged is

    m= (xM)/vN_A) = (QM)/(eN_A *v) = (QM) / (vF)
    where
    N_A is the Avogadro constant;
    Q = xe is the total charge, equal to the number of electrons (x) times the elementary charge e;
    F is the Faraday constant.
    --- end quoting Wikipedia ---

    No, the Faraday law of Electrolysis will not work on water with a correct answer, because H is not an atom but H2 is an Atom. And where one of the proton+muon converts to being a neutron to the other proton+muon.

    So if Faraday's law of Electrolysis was applied to water, thinking it would deliver a true answer is mistaken because the one H converts to neutron.

    So it appears that we need to directly measure the test tube of oxygen and the test tube of hydrogen by a direct mass measurement.

    AP
    Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
    Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
    1:14 AM (12 hours ago)



    to Plutonium Atom Universe
    I doubt we can measure a test tube of hydrogen or test tube of oxygen, too small to determine the mass on some sort of weight scale.

    But here is a possible lucrative idea. We should be able to get pure deuterium water. Then run the electrolysis. Collect the test tubes.

    Now have some sort of balancing beam weight scale. Place the regular water of hydrogen test tube on one side, and place the deuterium water hydrogen test tube on other side. If they stay balanced, then AP is correct and Water is really H4O.

    AP
    Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
    Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
    1:48 AM (11 hours ago)



    to Plutonium Atom Universe
    Cosmic Rays from Sun

    90% of Sun's cosmic rays are 840MeV proton+muon inside = H. The hydrogen Atom is H2 where one of the H proton+muon converts to being a neutron.

    When these proton+muon hit Earth atmosphere, they can turn into pions and muons.

    I commented that H alone is a subatomic particle and that makes sense in the idea that Sun's cosmic rays are 90% these proton+muon.

    Now is interstellar hydrogen H2 and intergalactic hydrogen H2 formed when one H cosmic ray joins up with another H cosmic ray to form H2 atom?

    Is this how we get H2 in outer space? From the splitting apart of H2 into H cosmic rays?

    So how much of the Sun's hydrogen is H2 and how much is H ready to join with another H and reform back into H2. Probably little of the Sun's H is H alone, and the vast majority of the Sun's hydrogen is H2.

    How much deuterium in the Sun? And it is a higher percentage than the deuterium in water on Earth?

    AP
    Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
    Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium....@gmail.com>
    3:11 AM (10 hours ago)



    to Plutonium Atom Universe
    Water is the only known non-metallic substance that expands when if freezes; its density decreases and it expands approximately 9% by volume. (Source: web Lunar and Planetary Institute)

    I have to wait for experimental chemists and physicists to weigh the mass of test tubes from electrolysis, as to the verdict-- water is H4O.

    But until that news comes in, I will look for other means of proof.

    So AP says that the H2 is not a molecule but is the hydrogen Atom itself, where one proton+muon converts to a neutron and capacitates the other proton+muon which undergo the Faraday law.

    There are subatomic particles of H in the form of Cosmic Rays from the Sun, but most of the Sun's hydrogen is H2, and flips back and forth from H to rejoining to form H2. Some gets away from the Sun and is cosmic rays.

    But H2 is an Atom and H is a fleeting subatomic particle.

    So can I prove Water is H4O from the data of Spectral lines of H2 is the same as deuterium, only slight difference is that the deuterium is a full fledged neutron not a makeshift proton+muon of H.

    I suspect that special trait of water freezing is a proof that Water is H4O. Because the 840MeV proton torus with muon inside doing the Faraday law acting as a makeshift neutron capacitor for the other 840MeV proton torus with muon inside, is where
    H2 gets that expansion characteristic.

    A neutron is a parallel plate capacitor and those plates can expand when frozen temperature occurs. As the temperature gets colder, those plates move further apart.

    Now does deuterium which truly has a full neutron, does it expand also when frozen?? If so, does it expand as much as H2 which is 2 protons with 2 muons inside?

    So comparing the freezing and expansion of the parallel plates of a neutron in deuterium with the freezing and expansion of one of the proton+muon that is acting as a makeshift neutron in H2.

    If I can numbers correlate the H2 expansion with the Deuterium expansion would be a alternative proof that Water is really H4O and not H2O.

    AP
    to
    So now on Blankenship's book "Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis", 2014, page 134, shows The structure of ATP, ADP, AMP. And within that structure are OH hydroxyls.

    In New Chemistry, water is truly H4O, and where hydroxyls are now H2O. And we have first proof of this in the Figure 8.1 of Blankenship's "Chemical structure of ATP".

    For in the lower left corner of the diagram, Blankenship has a H+ all alone, (really a mindless error) and has P surrounded by O-, O-, O and OH. The OH is really H2O for hydroxyls are H2O and water itself is H4O, and that would leave that mindless
    H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.

    The world of physics and chemistry should drop what they are doing and weigh the electrolysis test tube of hydrogen and oxygen to discover the correct true formula of water is H4O.

    AP is total confident, becuase an Atom cannot exist if it has no capacitor structure such as a neutron, or one of the H in H2 acting as a neutron. I am totally confident that Water formula is truly H4O. And I need look only to methane of H4C, to
    realize that there is no HC, no H2C, no H3C, but starts with H4C, and that tells me water starts with H4O. Totally confident that Old Chemistry, Old Physics did electrolysis experiments and the moment they saw hydrogen test tube be 2x volume of oxygen
    test tube, they dropped their work and went out for a Danish and coffee break, rather than finish their work--- actual physics weighing of atomic mass units (not the Faraday electrolysis law for it does not apply to water).

    When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.

    AP, King of Science
    Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
    Archimedes Plutonium
    9:34 AM (15 minutes ago)



    to
    On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 8:56:57 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
    Now I see some of these electronic weighing scales are accurate to 0.00001 gram. I do not know if that is within the accuracy I need for weighing a test tube of oxygen then a test tube of hydrogen from water electrolysis.

    Now modern day physics and chemist experimenters can really do a marvelous job if they wanted to. For they could freeze the test tubes of oxygen and hydrogen to where they are liquid and compare liquids from water electrolysis.
    Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
    Archimedes Plutonium
    10:01 AM (5 hours ago)



    to
    So, what AP is saying here is that we do electrolysis of water. We collect the two test tubes, one with oxygen the other with hydrogen.

    To prove Water is truly the formula H4O and not H2O we must weigh the masses of the two tubes to find that the ratio is 1 x 16amu to 4 x 1amu.

    The silly grotesque science error of the past was to look at volumes in the two test tubes-- "Hey-- the hydrogen is twice the volume of oxygen so the formula of water is H2O".

    No, way was that science good practice. For the correct formula of water needs to be measured by mass, by atomic mass units where Oxygen is 16amu and hydrogen is 1amu.

    I suspect a balance beam scale is good enough to see the hydrogen test tube will be 1/4 as massive as the oxygen test tube. To get within precision of electronic weighing scale of 0.00001 gram we just have to make a larger test tube of electrolysis
    of water.

    AP is betting that the readings will be hydrogen test tube 1/4 the mass of oxygen test tube proving Water formula is truly H4O.

    Old Physics and Old Chemistry is betting that the mass experiment will have the hydrogen test tube be 1/8 the mass of the oxygen test tube, proving Water formula is H2O.

    AP does not have these precision equipment to conduct an at-home experiment of this nature.

    AP
    Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
    Archimedes Plutonium
    12:38 PM (4 hours ago)



    to
    So, once Water is found to actually be H4O, not H2O, we move on to methane, and ask the same question of its hydrogen bonds. Is Methane really that of H8C and not H4C.

    Well, looking in the literature for anomalies to methane, I come across a arXiv "Low and high-temperature anomalies in the physical properties of solid methane "The anomalous behavior of thermodynamic, spectral, plastic, elastic and some other
    properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...

    AP wonders: if they can get methane to solid form, well, I am then hopeful that the mass of the molecule can be determined. Because if methane is truly H8C, that difference of H4 in atomic mass units would be very much noticeable difference.

    Chemistry Europe--
    "The Anomalous Deuterium Isotope Effect in the NMR Spectrum of Methane...

    P Vermeeren, 2023
    "The abnormally long and weak methylidyne C-H bond.."
    "The C-H bond of the methylidyne radical, CH*, is abnormally long and weak, even longer and..."

    AP asks, are these anomalies solved if we consider methane is actually H8C and not H4C?

    AP


    Univ Toronto, physics, Gordon F. West, Michael B. Walker, Henry M. Van Driel, David J. Rowe, John W. Moffat, John F. Martin, Robert K. Logan, Albert E. Litherland, Roland List, Philipp Kronberg, James King, Anthony W. Key, Bob Holdom, Ron M.
    Farquhar, R. Nigel Edwards, David J. Dunlop, James Drummond, Tom E. Drake, R.Fraser Code, Richard C. Bailey, Robin Armstrong

    Chancellor Rose M. Patten
    Pres. Meric Gertler

    Chancellor Linda Hasenfratz
    President Alan Shepard
    Amit Chakma (chem engr)

    Univ. Western Ontario physics dept
    Pauline Barmby, Shantanu Basu, Peter Brown, Alex Buchel, Jan Cami, Margret Campbell-Brown, Blaine Chronik, Robert Cockcroft, John R. de Bruyn, Colin Denniston, Giovanni Fanchini, Sarah Gallagher, Lyudmila Goncharova, Wayne Hocking, Martin Houde,
    Jeffrey L. Hutter, Carol Jones, Stan Metchev, Silvia Mittler, Els Peeters, Robert Sica, Aaron Sigut, Peter Simpson, Mahi Singh, Paul Wiegert, Eugene Wong, Martin Zinke-Allmang



    James Leech, Linda Hasenfratz, Rose M. Patten,Michael Meighen, Susan Haack, Leo Harrington, William Alvin Howard, Ronald Jensen, Dick de Jongh by Dan Christensen
    On Saturday, July 31, 2021 at 8:29:35 PM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote:
    STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim

    1Canada's NSF-- Francois-Philippe Champagne, Ted Hewitt, Martha Crago, Frederic Bouchard, Cinthia Duclos, Normand Labrie

    2Many asking how much is Dan Christensen paid for stalker (perhaps as much as a million dollars whereas teachers actually teaching math are lucky with $100,000.)
    ---quoting Wikipedia ---
    Controversy
    Many government and university installations blocked, threatened to block, or attempted to shut-down The World's Internet connection until Software Tool & Die was eventually granted permission by the National Science Foundation to provide public
    Internet access on "an experimental basis."
    --- end quote ---

    Morons of logic with their error filled Boole Logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction.
    Peter Bruce Andrews, Lennart Aqvist, Henk Barendregt, John Lane Bell, Nuel Belnap,
    Paul Benacerraf, Jean Paul Van Bendegem, Johan van Benthem, Jean-Yves Beziau,
    Andrea Bonomi, Nicolas Bourbaki (a group of logic fumblers), Alan Richard Bundy, Gregory Chaitin,
    Jack Copeland, John Corcoran, Dirk van Dalen, Martin Davis, Michael A.E. Dummett, John Etchemendy, Hartry Field, Kit Fine, Melvin Fitting, Matthew Foreman, Michael Fourman,
    Harvey Friedman, Dov Gabbay, L.T.F. Gamut (group of logic fumblers), Sol Garfunkel, Jean-Yves Girard, Siegfried Gottwald, Jeroen Groenendijk, Susan Haack, Leo Harrington, William Alvin Howard,
    Ronald Jensen, Dick de Jongh, David Kaplan, Alexander S. Kechris, Howard Jerome Keisler,
    Robert Kowalski, Georg Kreisel, Saul Kripke, Kenneth Kunen, Karel Lambert, Penelope Maddy,
    David Makinson, Isaac Malitz, Gary R. Mar, Donald A. Martin, Per Martin-Lof,Yiannis N. Moschovakis, Jeff Paris, Charles Parsons, Solomon Passy, Lorenzo Pena, Dag Prawitz,
    Graham Priest, Michael O. Rabin, Gerald Sacks, Dana Scott, Stewart Shapiro, Theodore Slaman,
    Robert M. Solovay, John R. Steel, Martin Stokhof, Anne Sjerp Troelstra, Alasdair Urquhart,
    Moshe Y. Vardi, W. Hugh Woodin, John Woods

    Everything Jan Burse or Dan Christensen do in logic-- worthless until they recognize and accept the fact that Boole messed up bigtime, for he screwed up AND with OR, and his logic truth tables are a pile of shit. But Dan and Jan have shit for
    brains and keep on keeping on with their moron logic 2 OR 3 = 5 with 3 AND 2 resulting in 1.

    Re: *Fire the entire Univ Western Ontario math dept/ still teaching that the contradictory sine graph as sinusoid when it is really semicircle
    by Dan Christensen Nov 21, 2017,

    Re: 81,045-Student victims of Rose M. Patten Univ Toronto from stalker Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Univ Toronto, physics, Gordon F. West, Michael B. Walker
    by Frank Cassa 12Apr2021 7:00 AM


    Re: 77,233 Student victims of Lawrence Bacow's Harvard from stalker Kibo Parry Moroney with his 938 is 12% short 945, his 10 OR 4 = 14 with AND as subtraction, and his mindless belief real electron = 0.5MeV when true electron is muon
    11:57 AM 10Apr2021
    by Wayne Decarlo



    Re: 7,744-Student victims of Linda Hasenfratz Univ Western Ontario from stalker Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Chancellor Linda Hasenfratz President Alan
    Shepard
    11:53 AM 10Apr2021
    by Wayne Decarlo

    Re: 102,852-Student victims of Dominic Barton, Univ Waterloo from stalker Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus Dominic Barton, President Feridun Hamdullahpur
    physics
    by konyberg Apr 15, 2021, 3:09:41 PM

    Re: 176,232-Student Victims of Michael Meighen McGill Univ by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus... 0.5MeV electron when in truth it is the muon as the real
    electron
    by Dan Christensen Jul 2, 2021, 9:47:42 AM


    Re: 135,568 Student victims Queen's Univ. James Leech, Arthur B. McDonald by Dan Christensen teaching 10 OR 2 = 12 with AND as subtraction, never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus-- his mindless electron =0.5MeV when real electron
    of
    May 10, 2021
    by Professor Wordsmith


    Re: 1.1Dr. John Baez is a failed mathematician-physicist with his proton of 938MeV when it is 840MeV, electron= muon //his ellipse is a conic when it never was// as phony in math and physics as kibo Parry Moroney's ellipse and Christensen 10 OR 4 =
    by Dan Christensen Sep 22, 2019, 9:54:06 AM


    5th published book

    Suspend all College Classes in Logic, until they Fix their Errors // Logic series, book 1 Kindle Edition
    by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)

    First comes Logic-- think straight and clear which many logic and math professors are deaf dumb and blind to, and simply refuse to recognize and fix their errors.

    The single biggest error of Old Logic of Boole and Jevons was their "AND" and "OR" connectors. They got them mixed up and turned around. For their logic ends up being that of 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1, when even the local village idiot knows that
    3 AND 2 = 5 (addition) with 3 OR 2 = either 3 or 2 (subtraction). And secondly, their error of the If->Then conditional. I need to make it clear enough to the reader why the true Truth Table of IF --> Then requires a U for unknown or uncertain with a
    probability outcome for F --> T = U and F --> F = U. Some smart readers would know that the reason for the U is because without the U, Logic has no means of division by 0 which is undefined in mathematics. You cannot have a Logic that is less than
    mathematics. A logic that is impoverished and cannot do a "undefined for division by 0 in mathematics". The true logic must be able to have the fact that division by 0 is undefined. True logic is larger than all of mathematics, and must be able to fetch
    any piece of mathematics from out of Logic itself. So another word for U is undefined. And this is the crux of why Reductio ad Absurdum cannot be a proof method of mathematics, for a starting falsehood in a mathematics proof can only lead to a
    probability end conclusion.

    My corrections of Old Logic have a history that dates before 1993, sometime around 1991, I realized the Euclid proof of infinitude of primes was illogical, sadly sadly wrong, in that the newly formed number by "multiply the lot and add 1" was
    necessarily a new prime in the indirect proof method. So that my history of fixing Old Logic starts in 1991, but comes to a synthesis of correcting all four of the connectors of Equal/not, And, Or, If->Then, by 2015.

    Cover picture: some may complain my covers are less in quality, but I have a good reason for those covers-- I would like covers of math or logic to show the teacher's own handwriting as if he were back in the classroom writing on the blackboard or
    an overhead projector.
    Length: 63 pages

    File Size: 764 KB
    Print Length: 63 pages

    Publication Date: March 12, 2019
    Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
    Language: English
    ASIN: B07PMB69F5
    Text-to-Speech: Enabled
    X-Ray: Not Enabled
    Word Wise: Not Enabled
    Lending: Enabled
    Screen Reader: Supported
    Enhanced Typesetting: Enabled

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeffrey Rubard@21:1/5 to Archimedes Plutonium on Wed Jul 26 12:35:05 2023
    On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM UTC-7, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
    Kibo Parry review of his corpse fucking:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:31:44 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
    "physics hater"


    Kibo on his corpse fucking, that is Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, sci.math 30 year stalker defiler and demonizer

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:23:59 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote: >"physics hater"

    Re: 2- Why Canada's Dan Christensen does not denounce his friends necrophilia-- Kibo,Zelos, Chris Thomasson "I want to fuck her corpse". Apparently Dan is woven from the same clothe.
    by Jeffrey Rubard Jan 29, 2023, 6:39 PM

    Are these "deceptively juxtaposed", do you think? (I didn't write the line above my name.)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jeffrey Rubard@21:1/5 to Jeffrey Rubard on Thu Jul 27 11:29:46 2023
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:35:09 PM UTC-7, Jeffrey Rubard wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM UTC-7, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
    Kibo Parry review of his corpse fucking:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:31:44 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote: >"physics hater"


    Kibo on his corpse fucking, that is Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, sci.math 30 year stalker defiler and demonizer

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:23:59 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote: >"physics hater"

    Re: 2- Why Canada's Dan Christensen does not denounce his friends necrophilia-- Kibo,Zelos, Chris Thomasson "I want to fuck her corpse". Apparently Dan is woven from the same clothe.
    by Jeffrey Rubard Jan 29, 2023, 6:39 PM
    Are these "deceptively juxtaposed", do you think? (I didn't write the line above my name.)

    Does it maybe "look as though" I did write that?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Volney@21:1/5 to Jeffrey Rubard on Tue Aug 1 08:39:10 2023
    On 7/27/2023 2:29 PM, Jeffrey Rubard wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:35:09 PM UTC-7, Jeffrey Rubard wrote:
    On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 11:34:23 PM UTC-7, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
    Kibo Parry review of his corpse fucking:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:31:44 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
    "physics hater"


    Kibo on his corpse fucking, that is Kibo Parry Moroney Volney, sci.math 30 year stalker defiler and demonizer

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 12:23:59 AM UTC-5, Volney wrote:
    "physics hater"

    Re: 2- Why Canada's Dan Christensen does not denounce his friends necrophilia-- Kibo,Zelos, Chris Thomasson "I want to fuck her corpse". Apparently Dan is woven from the same clothe.
    by Jeffrey Rubard Jan 29, 2023, 6:39 PM
    Are these "deceptively juxtaposed", do you think? (I didn't write the line above my name.)

    Does it maybe "look as though" I did write that?

    This is a great example of ArchiePoo's projection. Someone says
    something to/about ArchiePoo which makes him feel uncomfortable or
    something (because subconsciously he knows it may be true), and in some
    other post ArchiePoo misquotes the person and makes it sound like the
    person made the statement about someone completely uninvolved in all of
    this. Like the line misattributed to you. It's psychological projection
    and is well-known.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

    Another recent example:

    AP: If I am correct, then bla bla bla
    Me: Won't happen. AP is always wrong.
    AP (in some completely unrelated post) Why does Volney say Dr. Hau is
    always wrong?

    That's psychological projection from feeling uneasy by being told he's
    always wrong. He misdirects the statement to being about someone
    completely unrelated. AP does this ALL THE TIME.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)