On Wednesday, September 27, 2023 at 11:41:12 PM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
A scientist long ago made a remark that goes like this: "Theory is important, but imagination is everything".
And this is the crux between theory and imagination.
Theory is a composition of facts and data with some logic holding it together. While Imagination is a free for all, with more likelihood of error than correctness.
A few years back we had a huge explosion in Beirut of a fertilizer silo. This involves a chemical explosion involving nitrogen, not unlike a Atomic bomb explosion.
Theory involves science and logic. Imagination involves everything and is thus prone to huge error and mistakes.
So I start this book with Imagination and quickly am reigned in by theory, data and logic and science.
We experienced the opposite of explosion this year when a submersible imploded in deep ocean water. Not much we have to explain there, outside pressure more enormous than what container can hold back. But an implosion is really far different from a
atomic bomb explosion or even a chemical explosion.
Today I need to correct my remarks of yesterday. The mechanism of a Atomic bomb explosion is not the imagination of a neutron as parallel plate capacitor as 945MeV as 945 sharp cutting knife discs that cut the plutonium atom torus of 94x840 plates as
they then form a explosion of all those plates exiting the Atom.
Rarely does imagination follow logic and reason and that is why it is often more wrong than correct.
Logic Reason: Primal Axiom of Physics-- All is Atom, and Atoms are nothing but electricity and magnetism.
So the explanation of the submersible implosion and the fertilizer explosion and the Atomic bomb explosion-- all their explanation comes down to electricity and magnetism.
Is there really a difference between a chemical explosion such as nitrogen chemistry and that of Atomic bomb explosion, or are they the same mechanism only of a different scale of power?
Years back, I was writing a book about the mechanism of Short Circuit in a small battery. And I experimented. And found that it would explode (do not try this yourself).
Logical Reasoning:: If all comes down to a explanation of electricity and magnetism, the explosion of a battery via short circuit is the same mechanism as the explosion of chemicals such as nitrogen fertilizer or atomic bombs.
If we conceive (or imagine) the 945MeV neutron or the 840MeV proton or the 105MeV muon of Atomic Physics as all those windings 945, 840, 105 each winding as pure energy, then the explosion of a Atomic Bomb is the short circuiting of all those individual
closed loops.
So, I dangerously took a new battery and short circuited it and immediately felt a rush of "high heat" inside the battery, and immediately stopped, for I did not want a battery to explode.
The mechanism of the Atomic missile or Atomic bomb is not that of knives cutting up the closed loops of 945,840,105. The mechanism is that the neutrons short circuit the closed loops.
My 151st published book of science.
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also,
physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics
super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts,
throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as
template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in
1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard,
not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that
awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics
education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
Product details
• ASIN : B09JW5DVYM
• Publication date : October 19, 2021
• Language : English
• File size : 1048 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Print length : 404 pages
• Best Sellers Rank: #4,844,838 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
◦ #487 in Electromagnetic Theory
◦ #1,210 in Electromagnetism (Kindle Store)
◦ #8,751 in Electromagnetism (Books)
TEACHING TRUE PHYSICS// 1st year College// Physics textbook series, book 4
by Archimedes Plutonium
Last revision was June 2023. And this is AP's 151st published book of science.
Preface: This is AP's 151st book of science published. It is one of my most important books of science because 1st year college physics is so impressionable on students, if they should continue with physics, or look elsewhere for a career. And also,
physics is a crossroad to all the other hard core sciences, where physics course is mandatory such as in chemistry or even biology. I have endeavored to make physics 1st year college to be as easy and simple to learn. In this endeavor to make physics
super easy, I have made the writing such that you will see core ideas in all capital letters as single sentences as a educational tool. And I have made this textbook chapter writing follow a logical pattern of both algebra and geometry concepts,
throughout. The utmost importance of logic in physics needs to be seen and understood. For I have never seen a physics book, prior to this one that is logical. Every Old Physics textbook I have seen is scatter-brained in topics and in writing. I use as
template book of Halliday & Resnick because a edition of H&R was one I was taught physics at University of Cincinnati in 1969. And in 1969, I had a choice of majors, do I major in geology, or mathematics, or in physics, for I will graduate from UC in
1972. For me, geology was too easy, but physics was too tough, so I ended up majoring in mathematics. If I had been taught in 1969 using this textbook that I have written, I would have ended up majoring in physics, my first love. For physics is not hard,
not hard at all, once you clear out the mistakes and the obnoxious worthless mathematics that clutters up Old Physics, and the illogic that smothers much of Old Physics.
Maybe it was good that I had those impressions of physics education of poor education, which still exists throughout physics today. Because maybe I am forced to write this book, because of that awful experience of learning physics in 1969. Without that
awful experience, maybe this textbook would have never been written by me.
Cover picture is the template book of Halliday & Resnick, 1988, 3rd edition Fundamentals of Physics and sitting on top are cut outs of "half bent circles, bent at 90 degrees" to imitate magnetic monopoles. Magnetic Monopoles revolutionizes physics
education, and separates-out, what is Old Physics from what is New Physics.
The world needs a new standard in physics education since Feynman set the standard in 1960s with his "Lectures on Physics" that lasted until about 1990 and then AP's Atom Totality theory caused Feynman's Lectures to be completely outdated. And so much
has changed in physics since 1960s that AP now sets the new world standard in physics education with this series of textbooks.
To be a Master of physics or Calculus or Mathematics, has to be seen in "signs and signals". Can you correct the mistakes and errors of Old Physics, of Old Calculus, of Old Math? If you cannot clean up the fakery of Old Physics, of Old Calculus, of Old
Math, you have no business, no reason to write a physics, calculus or math textbook. There is an old legend in England about King Arthur, and the legend goes, that the King is the one who pulls Excalibur out of the iron anvil. Pulling the sword out of
the anvil is a metaphor for Cleaning up all the mistakes and errors of Old Physics, of Old Calculus, of Old Math. You have to clean up and clear out the mistakes and errors of the past, for Physics to move forward.
Should you write a textbook on Calculus, if you cannot see that the slant cut in a cone is a oval, never the ellipse? Of course not. Should you write a Calculus textbook if you cannot do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus? Of course not.
Should you write a physics textbook if you cannot ask the question, which is the atom's real true electron, is it the muon or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole.
Feynman was the prior King of Physics before AP showed up. Feynman wrote the last textbook in 1960s to guide physics forward, and although Feynman did not clean up much of Old Physics, he did direct the way forward in that Electricity and Magnetism in
his Quantum Electrodynamics was the way forward. It would have been nice for Feynman to have found that it is impossible for a 0.5MeV particle to be the atom's electron moving near the speed of light outside the proton of hydrogen and still remain an
atom, thus all atoms collapse. It would have been nice for Feynman to say the muon is the real atom's electron and that the 0.5MeV particle was Dirac's magnetic monopole. But it just was not in the fated cards of Feynman's physics. Yet, his textbook
served the leadership of physics from 1960 to 1990. Time we have the new replacement of physics textbook.
Now, in 2021, we need a new textbook that carries all of physics forward into the future for the next 100 years, and that is what this textbook is. I predict this textbook will carry physics forward to at least year 2100, and if I am lucky, perhaps my
book will last for thousands of years as the standard bearer of Physics education.
I will use Halliday and Resnick textbook as template to garner work exercise problems for 1st year and 2nd year college. For 3rd and senior year college physics I will directly use Feynman's Lectures and QED, quantum electrodynamics. Correcting Feynman
and setting the stage that all of physics is-- All is Atom and Atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
Much and most of 20th century physics was error filled and illogical physics, dead end , stupid paths such as General Relativity, Big Bang, Black holes, gravity waves, etc etc. Dead end stupidity is much of Old Physics of the 20th century. What
distinguishes Feynman, is he kept his head above the water by concentrating almost exclusively on Electrodynamics. He remarked words to the effect== "QED is the most precise, most accurate theory in all of physics". And, that is true, given All is Atom,
and Atoms are nothing but Electricity and Magnetism.
This textbook is going to set the world standard on college physics education. Because I have reduced the burden of mathematics, reduced it to be almost what I call -- difficult-free-math. I mean, easy-math. Meaning that all functions and equations of
math and physics are just polynomials. All functions of math and physics are polynomials. Making calculus super super easy because all you ever do is plug in the Power rules for derivative and integral, so that physics math is able to be taught in High
School. In other words, physics with almost no math at all-- so to speak, or what can be called as easy as learning add, subtract, multiply, divide.
What makes both math and physics extremely hard to learn and understand is when mathematics never cleans itself up, and never tries to make itself easy. If all of math can be made as easy as add, subtract, multiply, divide, no one would really complain
about math or physics. But because math is overrun by kooks (definition of kook: is a person who cares more about fame and fortune than about truth in science), that math has become a incomprehensible trash pile and the worst of all the sciences, and
because the math is so difficult, it carried over into physics, making physics difficult.
And that may sound like a contradiction that AP ended up majoring in mathematics, rather than his first love of physics. But not a contradiction in truth. Because in Old Physics, you have not only a use of the messed up dirty Old Math, but you have use
of what I call "idealisms" in Old Physics. Idealisms are "suppose this and that.... " "imagine a ball of mass moving in space....." So Old Physics not only had the tangled mess of kook math of trigonometry everywhere and thousands of silly rules for
calculus. But Old Physics had a fakery contraption of "idealism". I ended up majoring in mathematics, although math was a mess, but at least I could still navigate in that mess. But I just could not navigate in physics with their math mess plus, their
idealism mess. If you closely examine all Old Physics textbooks, even the latest recent ones, they are all "idealism physics". Idealism is a nice and better term for "fake physics".
You see, one of the greatest omissions of science in the 20th and 21st century was the idea that both math and physics can be reduced to a Simplicity of education. That math need not be hard and difficult. That physics can be made logical, not full of
idealisms. Yet no-one in the 20th and 21st century ever had that idea of simplicity, (with the possible exception of Harold Jacobs in mathematics) that math had run out-of-bounds as a science and was more of a science fiction subject for kook
mathematicians. Math had become absurdly difficult because of the reason that kooks gain fame and fortune on making math difficult. Mathematicians never thought their job was to make math simple and easy, instead, the kooks of math piled on more trash
and garbage to make math a twilight zone of science. The same in physics with idealism run amok. And this is easily proven true about the sociology of math and physics education for it is no secret to anyone in education that college professors are paid
not for their teaching so much, no, they are recognized and paid for their research, and this means the simplification of math or physics is secondary, not of first importance. College professor research is of more importance to them, than their failure
to make physics or mathematics clear and easy to learn.
When you make all of math be just polynomial equations and functions, you make math the easiest of the major sciences, which then follows up by making physics easy as possible. For there is no longer trigonometry to cloud the mind in everything you do in
physics. There is no longer hundreds of calculus rules you must learn just to do Faraday's law or Ampere's law.
So I end up writing this textbook, keeping in mind of AP way back in 1969 in a huge classroom of 1st year college physics, and how AP, the King of Science, especially Physics, would have majored in physics and not mathematics, if physics had been
properly taught.
---------------------------
Table of Contents
---------------------------
Part I, Introduction, and about physics.
a) About this textbook and series of Physics textbooks.
b) Brief history lesson of 20th century physics.
c) How we make the mathematics super easy.
d) Horrible error-filled concept of "charge" in Old Physics, and thrown out of New Physics.
e) We increasingly have to use Biology DNA knowledge to unravel the physics of light waves and EM theory.
Part II, 6 Laws of EM theory.
f) The 6 laws of EM, ElectroMagnetic theory and their Units.
g) Matrix of the 6 EM laws.
h) Fixing the horrible mistake of Old Physics units of Magnetic field compared to Electric field.
i) The four differential equations laws of EM theory.
j) Defining the units of Coulomb and Ampere as C = A*seconds; and the Elementary-Coulomb.
k) Faraday Constant Experiment in classroom.
l) Matching the physics Algebra of units with the physics Geometry of units.
m) The EM Spectrum, Electromagnetic Spectrum where electricity is placed between X-rays and gamma rays.
Part III, 1st Law of EM theory.
n) 1st Law of EM theory; law of Magnetic Monopole and units are B = m^2 / A*s^2 = m^2/ C*s.
Part IV, 2nd Law of EM theory.
o) 2nd Law of EM theory; New Ohm's Law V = CBE, the Capacitor (battery) law.
p) Short Circuit.
q) Series versus Parallel Circuits connection of closed loop.
r) Review of Geometry volume in 3D and path in 2D.
Part V, 3rd Law of EM theory.
s) 3rd law of EM theory, Faraday's law, C' = (V/(BE))'.
t) Short history lesson of Old Physics, 1860s Maxwell Equations.
u) New Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Experiment observing Faraday Law.
v) Math Algebra for making one physical concept be perpendicular to another physical concept.
w) EM laws derive the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
x) Principle of Maximum Electricity and Torus geometry so essential in Atomic Physics.
Part VI
y) 4th law of EM theory; Ampere-Maxwell law B' = (V/(CE))'.
Part VII
z) 5th law of EM theory; Coulomb-gravity law; E' = (V/(CB))'.
aa) Centripetal versus Centrifugal force explained.
Part VIII
bb) 6th Law of EM theory, Transformer law; differential equation of New Ohm's Law V' = (CBE)'.
cc) Reinventing the Multivariable Calculus.
dd) Atomic bomb physics comes directly out of short circuit of V'=(CBE)', for atoms have no nucleus, just a thrusting muon inside a 840MeV proton torus.
ee) Electric Permittivity and Magnetic Permeability explained.
ff) Two proofs that electricity is not the flow of 0.5MeV particles but is waves between X-rays and gamma rays.
gg) Unification of the 3 Kepler laws with EM theory.
hh) Unification of Newton 4 laws of motion with EM theory.
AP
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)