tarded:
of Physics
tarded:
tries to blame his Stupid Word
"antipositron" on me, like he blames his other Stupid Word "*n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*
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:
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
And I easily flip open some pages in CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, 1980 Waser, Trueblood, Knobler to page 311 for a sample of the Schrodinger equation as given by E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2).
This is the question before me. Which term in which equation of the AP-EM laws is the Schrodinger Equation?
Those 6 laws are these.measuring of volume in physics, volume of energy.
1) Magnetic monopole telling us what magnetism and electric current and magnetic field and electric field are.
2) New Ohm's law Voltage = capacitor-battery = quantity of current C times magnetic field times electric field. V= CBE. The equation of New Ohm's law is a math equation of volume Volume = length x width x height so we can expect that New Ohm's law is a
The next 4 laws are derivatives of all the possible 4 permutations of C, B, E, and V.
3) Rate of change of C, quantity current, C' = (V/(BE))' Faraday law.
4) Rate of change of B, magnetic field, B' = (V/(CE))' Ampere-Maxwell law.
5) Rate of change of E, electric field, E' = (V/(CB))' Coulomb law & gravity.
6) The rate of change of V= CBE as V' = (CBE)' as AC transformer law.
C' = (V/(BE))' = V'BE/(BE)^2 - VB'E/(BE)^2 - VBE'/(BE)^2 which is Faraday's law.
1st term as current production -- 2nd term as Lenz law -- 3rd term as DC, AC direction
B' = (V/(CE))' = V'CE/(CE)^2 - VC'E/(CE)^2 - VCE')/(CE)^2 which is Ampere-Maxwell law.
1st term as B production -- 2nd term as Displacement current -- 3rd term as parallel attract
E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 which is Coulomb-gravity law.
1st term as E production -- 2nd term as inverse square of distance -- 3rd term as spin and orbit synchronicity
V' = (CBE)' = C'BE + CB'E + CBE' which is Transformer law
1st term as V production in a transformer -- 2nd term as inverse square root -- 3rd term as DC, AC synchronicity
Review all of this, the EM equations of physics and mathematics.
Faraday Law is (V/(B*L))' = i' from the AP-Maxwell Equations you learned in 1st year College.
1) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field B = kg /A*s^2
2) V = i*B*L New Ohm's law, law of electricity
3) V' = (i*B*L)' Capacitor Law of Physics
4) (V/i*L)' = B' Ampere-Maxwell law
5) (V/(B*L))' = i' Faraday law
6) (V/(i*B))' = L' the new law of Coulomb force with EM gravity force
PHYSICS LAWS
1) all the facts of chemistry and physics
2) Voltage V = kg*m^2/A*s^3
3) Current i = A = magnetic monopoles
4) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field B = kg /A*s^2
5) angular momentum L = m^2/(A*s)
6) V = i*B*L New Ohm's law, law of electricity
7) V' = (i*B*L)' Capacitor Law of Physics
8) (V/i*L)' = B' Ampere-Maxwell law
9) (V/(B*L))' = i' Faraday law
10) (V/(i*B))' = L' the new law of Coulomb force with EM gravity force
Algebra of 3D Calculus, for remember we did the algebra of
V' = (iBL)'
i' = (V/BL)'
B' = (V/iL)'
L' = (V/iB)'
--- quoting 1st year calculus from Teaching True ---
Using the Product Rule which is (fgh)' = (f'gh + fg'h + fgh')
Capacitor Law (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'L + i*B*L'
V' = (iBL)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L' here we have three terms explaining capacitors
Ampere-Maxwell Law
Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2
(V/i*L)' = B' = (V'*i*L - V*i' *L - V*i*L') / (i*L)^2
Maxwell had two terms in the Ampere-Maxwell law-- the produced magnetic field and a displacement current, but above we see we have also a third new term.
Faraday Law
(V/B*L)' = i' = (V'*B*L - V*B' *L - V*B*L') / (B*L)^2
------------
V' = (iBL)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L' reduces to
= iBL + iVL + iBL'
i' = V'*B*L/ (B*L)^2 - V*B' *L/ (B*L)^2 - V*B*L' / (B*L)^2 reduces to
i' = B^2*L/ (B*L)^2 - V^2 *L/ (B*L)^2 - V*B*L' / (B*L)^2 further reduces
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
B' = V'*i*L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i' *L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i*L' / (i*L)^2 reduces to
B' = B*i*L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i *L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i*L' / (i*L)^2 further reduces to = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
L' = (V/i*B)' = (V'*i*B - V*i' *B - V*i*B') / (i*B)^2 reduces to
L' = i*B^2 / (i*B)^2 - V*i *B / (i*B)^2 - V^2*i / (i*B)^2 further reduces to = 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2
--------
(1) V' = iBL + iVL + iBL'
(2) i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
(3) B' = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
(4) L' = 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2
Alright, so I replace L' in (1) with 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2
I get V' = iBL + iVL + iB*(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2 )
= iBL + iVL + B - V - V^2/ B
Doing the replacement in (2)
i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V*(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2) /BL^2
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - (V/iBL^2) - (V^2/iB^2L^2) - (V^3/(iB^3L^2))
Doing the replacement in (3)
B' = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
= B/iL - V/iL - V(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2)/iL^2
= B/iL - V/iL - (V/i^2L^2) - (V^2/i^2*B*L^2) - (V^3/( i^2B^2L^2))
Is there any geometrical significance I can ascribe to this? There are some cubes involved.
AP
Rest is the daily spam bombing of Pete Olcott in sci.math with his imaginary pretend people like Mr. Fribbleeee.limit analysis is not even a math proof for anyone can analysis things, analysis this post and only math hypocrites would think it is a proof.
Olcott can John Coates,David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain ever do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or is that totally foreign to them? Mind you, not a limit analysis hornswaggle for that is not geometry,
Re: Cambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning. And why do you encourage crank screwballs that repeat computer trash, Pete Olcott, spamming sci.math everyday?
On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 12:45:05 PM UTC-5, peteolcott wrote:
When I correct the errors of the foundation of math in a math group
this is bloody well not frigging spam.
..pets Olcott spam sci.math for I feed them both wet and dry food, like my cats, although my prized cat eats mostly fried chicken. Hello David-- this is 2022, not Britain with spitfires in WW2.
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the crank crackpot David Sainsbury owner and shopkeeper and bar that is University of Cambridge who feels passionate that Crackpots like Olcott should spam-bomb over sci.math, heavier than Russia bombs Ukraine. I love my
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'
..bomb sci.math.
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the spam bomber Pete Olcott of sci.math with my endless nonsense of halting. For I spam bomb sci.math because it irritates people, for I myself failed logic, math and science. And my only way of getting attention is to spam
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'
that thought fly way too above their heads?Olcott can Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. Or does
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see.
= 3 with AND as subtraction?Olcott, why cannot Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes, Irvine, Jardine ask the question which is the atom's real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle? Is it because they cannot even do logic correctly with their 2 OR 1
Calculus and these crazies still think the slant cut in cone is a ellipse when in fact it is a Oval. Why brainwash and pollute more students like Pete Olcott who is crazy enough as it is.Olcott why does Cambridge Univ Stephen J. Toope, David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain keep teaching Boole error filled logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, and never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of
have a brain to ask a simple question????Olcott why is noone in Cambridge physics able to ask the question which is the atom's true real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle? Sargent, Saunders, Saxena, Schneider, Scott, Scrivener, Sebastian, Simmons, Simons, Sirringhaus, Smith?? Do they not
Cowburn, Credgington, Cross, Croze, Deschler, Donald, Duffett-Smith, Dutton, Eiser, Ellis, Euser, Field, Flynn, Ford, Friend, Gibson, Green, Greenham, Gripaios, Grosche, Guck, Gull, Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes,Cambridge professors insane about Logic turns students like Pete Olcott insane also.
Cambridge Physics Dept
Ahnert, Alai, Alexander, Allison, Ansorge, Atature, Barker, Barnes, Bartlett, Batley, Baumberg, Bohndiek, Bowman, Brown, Buscher, Butler, Campbell Carilli, Carter, Castelnovo, Challis, Chalut, Chaudhri, Chin, Ciccarelli, Cicuta, Cole, Cooper,
between finite and infinite.Cambridge Math Dept
Alan Baker
Bela Bollobas
Darwin Smith
John Coates
Timothy Gowers
Peter Johnstone
Imre Leader
Gabriel Paternain
Can any-one at Cambridge start correcting the error filled Boole, Jevons, Russell, Whitehead, Godel, Wittgenstein, all failures of logic and logical reasoning, include Cantor and his tripe of undefined infinity, an infinity without a borderline
Cliff LHCb physicist to publish in the Cambridge Univ student newspaper of how sorry he is and apologizes for his physics stupidity of thinking that a hydrogen atom is composed of a electron of 0.5MeV flying around outside of a proton of 938MeV, flyingCambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning.Cambridge failures of physics who cannot even ask the question which is the atom's true real electron-- the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole. Harry Cliff, AP requires that Harry
what are known as neutrons. Because the muon is inside the proton it can fly around the torus inside at nearly the speed of light.Whereas the truth be known the real electron of a hydrogen atom is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus of 8 rings, where the muon and proton are doing the Faraday Law of producing more new electricity and storaging that electricity in
hydrogen atom can exist with a 0.5MeV particle flying around at 99% speed of light and stay put on a proton of 938MeV.Old Physics which Harry Cliff is a member, never took Logic, never learned how to think straight, think clear, and thus his physics knowledge is just hand down memorization. So stupid he never understood what the hell is angular momentum for no
AP says the 0.5MeV particle is Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. Now Dirac was a real physicist, but not Harry Cliff and everyone at CERN with their electron = 0.5MeV are fools of physics
"not one single marble of commonsense in my entire brain"
"imp of physics"
tarded:
Arindam Banerjee asks Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S.,Narendra Modi if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' in
Indian Institute of TechnologyKedar B Khare, Khare Neeraj, Kumar Sunil, Malik H.K., Mani Brajesh Kumar, Marathe Rahul, Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S. , Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., Ravishankar V. , Reddy G.B. , Saxena Vikrant, Sengupta Amartya, Senthilkumaran P. ,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K.,
Physics dept. Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata, Bhatnagar M.C. , Chatterjee R., Chaudhary Sujeet, Das Pintu, Dhaka Rajendra S., Ghosh Joyee, Ghosh Pradipta, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar,
Narendra Modi, Indian Prime Minister
Dharmendra Pradhan Minister of Education
WM-Feldhase asks Metin Tolan, Annalena Baerbock,Olaf Scholz if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' in
5m views
WM picture profile
WM
Fritz Feldhase
263
7:27PM
An inconsistency between...
Pete Olcott asks Harry Cliff, Roger Penrose, David Sainsbury if the 2nd derivative in Feynman's Electric field equation E = (q/4*pi*e_0) [ (e_r)'/(r'^2) + (r'/c)(d/dt)(e_r'/r'^2) + (1/c^2)((d^2/dt^2)(e_r')] if that 2nd derivative is the same as C' inAP's EM equations (modern day replacement of Maxwell Equations) E' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 = V'/CB - VC'/C^2B - VB'/CB^2. Now in the Schrodinger equation we also run into a 2nd derivative but there are only 1st derivatives in AP's EM
Kibo Parry M asks Univ Dayton Todd B Smith, J. Michael O'Hare which of the terms of the AP-EM Equations contains the Schrodinger Equation, is it in the Electric field derivative E' = (V/(CB))'Humberto Terrones, Gwo Ching Wang, Morris A Washington, Esther A. Wertz, Christian M. Wetzel, Ingrid Wilke, Shengbai Zhang
3m views
AP now thinks the second term - VC'B/(CB)^2 is the Schrodinger Equation in EM theory, would you agree?
Kibo Parry M asking Vincent Meunier, Donald Schwendeman which of the terms of the AP-EM Equations contains the Schrodinger Equation, is it in the Electric field derivative E' = (V/(CB))'
Kibo Parry M says Rensselaer physics is tarded
On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 10:27:58 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
tarded:
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,
Rensselaer math departmentFengyan 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
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,
CHEM ONE authors gives us a clue in their Schrodinger formula of E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2) with a footnote: alpha = 1.113*10^-10 C^2J^-1 m^-1 which is Coulomb force.
Kibo Parry M proud of his 2017 invention of the word ana........
On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 10:27:58 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
of Physics
tarded:
tries to blame his Stupid Word
"antipositron" on me, like he blames his other Stupid Word "*n*lb*ttf*ckm*n*r*
AP writes: is that how you pronounce your invented word at Spelling Bees Professor Wordsmith doing a documentary on Kibo's failure at Rensselaer with his 938 is 12% short of 945, yet, still Rensselaer graduates Kibo in engineering.
Re: Kibo Parry Moroney stalks "AnalButtfuckManure Attacks" Dartmouth's Philip J. Hanlon, Stanford's Marc Tessier-Lavigne with his 10 OR 6 = 16; his ellipse a conic when it never was; his proton to electron at 938 to 0.5 MeV when in truth..
1481 views
by Professor Wordsmith Aug 14, 2020, 11:07:05 AM
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:
Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
Force of gravity = G*(m_1*m_2)/ distance^2 (Newton's law by 1687)fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2 and as we reduce that we get 3 terms of f'/gh -fg'/g^2h - fh'/gh^2. And using the quotient rule renders (V/(CB))' as that of V'/CB - VC'/C^2B - VB'/CB^2.
Force of electrostatics = C(q_1*q_2)/ distance^2 (Coulomb law by 1785)
So let us state the Coulomb-gravity law of Physics. From one of the permutations of V= CBE we have E = (V/(CB)) and when we differentiate that by the calculus we have E' = (V/(CB))'. Now we use the quotient rule of calculus, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh -
E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 = V'/CB - VC'/C^2B - VB'/CB^2.
Harry, which term looks like the CHEM ONE equation--E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2)
So our Coulomb-gravity law has 3 terms and we can break down each of those 3 terms into statements.
So which of the AP-EM Equations is the Schrodinger Equation as given by CHEM ONE.
And I easily flip open some pages in CHEM ONE, 2nd edition, 1980 Waser, Trueblood, Knobler to page 311 for a sample of the Schrodinger equation as given by E_n = - (2*pi^2*m*Z^2*e^4) / (n^2*h^2* alpha^2).
This is the question before me. Which term in which equation of the AP-EM laws is the Schrodinger Equation?
a measuring of volume in physics, volume of energy.Those 6 laws are these.
1) Magnetic monopole telling us what magnetism and electric current and magnetic field and electric field are.
2) New Ohm's law Voltage = capacitor-battery = quantity of current C times magnetic field times electric field. V= CBE. The equation of New Ohm's law is a math equation of volume Volume = length x width x height so we can expect that New Ohm's law is
The next 4 laws are derivatives of all the possible 4 permutations of C, B, E, and V.
3) Rate of change of C, quantity current, C' = (V/(BE))' Faraday law.
4) Rate of change of B, magnetic field, B' = (V/(CE))' Ampere-Maxwell law.
5) Rate of change of E, electric field, E' = (V/(CB))' Coulomb law & gravity.
6) The rate of change of V= CBE as V' = (CBE)' as AC transformer law.
C' = (V/(BE))' = V'BE/(BE)^2 - VB'E/(BE)^2 - VBE'/(BE)^2 which is Faraday's law.
1st term as current production -- 2nd term as Lenz law -- 3rd term as DC, AC direction
B' = (V/(CE))' = V'CE/(CE)^2 - VC'E/(CE)^2 - VCE')/(CE)^2 which is Ampere-Maxwell law.
1st term as B production -- 2nd term as Displacement current -- 3rd term as parallel attract
E' = (V/(CB))' = V'CB/(CB)^2 - VC'B/(CB)^2 - VCB'/(CB)^2 which is Coulomb-gravity law.
1st term as E production -- 2nd term as inverse square of distance -- 3rd term as spin and orbit synchronicity
V' = (CBE)' = C'BE + CB'E + CBE' which is Transformer law
1st term as V production in a transformer -- 2nd term as inverse square root -- 3rd term as DC, AC synchronicity
Review all of this, the EM equations of physics and mathematics.
Faraday Law is (V/(B*L))' = i' from the AP-Maxwell Equations you learned in 1st year College.
1) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field B = kg /A*s^2
2) V = i*B*L New Ohm's law, law of electricity
3) V' = (i*B*L)' Capacitor Law of Physics
4) (V/i*L)' = B' Ampere-Maxwell law
5) (V/(B*L))' = i' Faraday law
6) (V/(i*B))' = L' the new law of Coulomb force with EM gravity force
PHYSICS LAWS
1) all the facts of chemistry and physics
2) Voltage V = kg*m^2/A*s^3
3) Current i = A = magnetic monopoles
4) Magnetic primal unit law Magnetic Field B = kg /A*s^2
5) angular momentum L = m^2/(A*s)
6) V = i*B*L New Ohm's law, law of electricity
7) V' = (i*B*L)' Capacitor Law of Physics
8) (V/i*L)' = B' Ampere-Maxwell law
9) (V/(B*L))' = i' Faraday law
10) (V/(i*B))' = L' the new law of Coulomb force with EM gravity force
Algebra of 3D Calculus, for remember we did the algebra of
V' = (iBL)'
i' = (V/BL)'
B' = (V/iL)'
L' = (V/iB)'
--- quoting 1st year calculus from Teaching True ---
Using the Product Rule which is (fgh)' = (f'gh + fg'h + fgh')
Capacitor Law (i*B*L)' = i'*B*L + i*B'L + i*B*L'
V' = (iBL)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L' here we have three terms explaining capacitors
Ampere-Maxwell Law
Using the Quotient Rule, which is (f/gh)' = (f'gh - fg'h - fgh')/(gh)^2
(V/i*L)' = B' = (V'*i*L - V*i' *L - V*i*L') / (i*L)^2
Maxwell had two terms in the Ampere-Maxwell law-- the produced magnetic field and a displacement current, but above we see we have also a third new term.
Faraday Law
(V/B*L)' = i' = (V'*B*L - V*B' *L - V*B*L') / (B*L)^2
------------
V' = (iBL)' = i'*B*L + i*B'*L + i*B*L' reduces to
= iBL + iVL + iBL'
i' = V'*B*L/ (B*L)^2 - V*B' *L/ (B*L)^2 - V*B*L' / (B*L)^2 reduces to
i' = B^2*L/ (B*L)^2 - V^2 *L/ (B*L)^2 - V*B*L' / (B*L)^2 further reduces
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
B' = V'*i*L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i' *L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i*L' / (i*L)^2 reduces to
B' = B*i*L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i *L/ (i*L)^2 - V*i*L' / (i*L)^2 further reduces to
= B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
L' = (V/i*B)' = (V'*i*B - V*i' *B - V*i*B') / (i*B)^2 reduces to
L' = i*B^2 / (i*B)^2 - V*i *B / (i*B)^2 - V^2*i / (i*B)^2 further reduces to
= 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2
--------
(1) V' = iBL + iVL + iBL'
(2) i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
(3) B' = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
(4) L' = 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2
Alright, so I replace L' in (1) with 1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2
I get V' = iBL + iVL + iB*(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2 )
= iBL + iVL + B - V - V^2/ B
Doing the replacement in (2)
i' = 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - VL'/BL^2
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - V*(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2) /BL^2
= 1/L - V^2/B^2*L - (V/iBL^2) - (V^2/iB^2L^2) - (V^3/(iB^3L^2))
Doing the replacement in (3)
B' = B/iL - V/iL - VL'/iL^2
= B/iL - V/iL - V(1/i - V/iB - V^2/iB^2)/iL^2
= B/iL - V/iL - (V/i^2L^2) - (V^2/i^2*B*L^2) - (V^3/( i^2B^2L^2))
Is there any geometrical significance I can ascribe to this? There are some cubes involved.
AP
geometry, limit analysis is not even a math proof for anyone can analysis things, analysis this post and only math hypocrites would think it is a proof.Rest is the daily spam bombing of Pete Olcott in sci.math with his imaginary pretend people like Mr. Fribbleeee.
Olcott can John Coates,David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain ever do a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, or is that totally foreign to them? Mind you, not a limit analysis hornswaggle for that is not
Re: Cambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning. And why do you encourage crank screwballs that repeat computer trash, Pete Olcott, spamming sci.math everyday?
On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 12:45:05 PM UTC-5, peteolcott wrote:
When I correct the errors of the foundation of math in a math group
this is bloody well not frigging spam.
pets Olcott spam sci.math for I feed them both wet and dry food, like my cats, although my prized cat eats mostly fried chicken. Hello David-- this is 2022, not Britain with spitfires in WW2...
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the crank crackpot David Sainsbury owner and shopkeeper and bar that is University of Cambridge who feels passionate that Crackpots like Olcott should spam-bomb over sci.math, heavier than Russia bombs Ukraine. I love my
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'
spam bomb sci.math...
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' Hi, I am the spam bomber Pete Olcott of sci.math with my endless nonsense of halting. For I spam bomb sci.math because it irritates people, for I myself failed logic, math and science. And my only way of getting attention is to
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'
that thought fly way too above their heads?Olcott can Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, ever ask the question, which is the atom's real electron, the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus doing the Faraday law or the 0.5MeV particle that AP calls the Dirac magnetic monopole. Or does
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see.
1 = 3 with AND as subtraction?Olcott, why cannot Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes, Irvine, Jardine ask the question which is the atom's real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle? Is it because they cannot even do logic correctly with their 2 OR
Calculus and these crazies still think the slant cut in cone is a ellipse when in fact it is a Oval. Why brainwash and pollute more students like Pete Olcott who is crazy enough as it is.Olcott why does Cambridge Univ Stephen J. Toope, David Sainsbury, Peter Johnstone, Imre Leader, Gabriel Paternain keep teaching Boole error filled logic of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction, and never a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of
not have a brain to ask a simple question????Olcott why is noone in Cambridge physics able to ask the question which is the atom's true real electron-- muon or 0.5MeV particle? Sargent, Saunders, Saxena, Schneider, Scott, Scrivener, Sebastian, Simmons, Simons, Sirringhaus, Smith?? Do they
Cowburn, Credgington, Cross, Croze, Deschler, Donald, Duffett-Smith, Dutton, Eiser, Ellis, Euser, Field, Flynn, Ford, Friend, Gibson, Green, Greenham, Gripaios, Grosche, Guck, Gull, Haniff, Heavens-Ward, Heine, Hine, Hobson, Hope-Coles, Howie, Hughes,Cambridge professors insane about Logic turns students like Pete Olcott insane also.
Cambridge Physics Dept
Ahnert, Alai, Alexander, Allison, Ansorge, Atature, Barker, Barnes, Bartlett, Batley, Baumberg, Bohndiek, Bowman, Brown, Buscher, Butler, Campbell Carilli, Carter, Castelnovo, Challis, Chalut, Chaudhri, Chin, Ciccarelli, Cicuta, Cole, Cooper,
between finite and infinite.Cambridge Math Dept
Alan Baker
Bela Bollobas
Darwin Smith
John Coates
Timothy Gowers
Peter Johnstone
Imre Leader
Gabriel Paternain
Can any-one at Cambridge start correcting the error filled Boole, Jevons, Russell, Whitehead, Godel, Wittgenstein, all failures of logic and logical reasoning, include Cantor and his tripe of undefined infinity, an infinity without a borderline
Cliff LHCb physicist to publish in the Cambridge Univ student newspaper of how sorry he is and apologizes for his physics stupidity of thinking that a hydrogen atom is composed of a electron of 0.5MeV flying around outside of a proton of 938MeV, flyingCambridge, you no longer are a premiere University but a school that fosters and shelters losers of logical reasoning.Cambridge failures of physics who cannot even ask the question which is the atom's true real electron-- the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton or the 0.5MeV particle that AP says is the Dirac magnetic monopole. Harry Cliff, AP requires that Harry
what are known as neutrons. Because the muon is inside the proton it can fly around the torus inside at nearly the speed of light.Whereas the truth be known the real electron of a hydrogen atom is the muon stuck inside a 840MeV proton torus of 8 rings, where the muon and proton are doing the Faraday Law of producing more new electricity and storaging that electricity in
hydrogen atom can exist with a 0.5MeV particle flying around at 99% speed of light and stay put on a proton of 938MeV.Old Physics which Harry Cliff is a member, never took Logic, never learned how to think straight, think clear, and thus his physics knowledge is just hand down memorization. So stupid he never understood what the hell is angular momentum for no
conic, replace it with Oval is the slant cut in cone.AP says the 0.5MeV particle is Dirac's Magnetic Monopole. Now Dirac was a real physicist, but not Harry Cliff and everyone at CERN with their electron = 0.5MeV are fools of physics
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet. https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe Archimedes Plutonium
AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium
Jun 30, 2022, 4:30:40 PM
to
Kibo Parry M says keep NSF Dr.Panchanathan instead of throwing him out like a piece of garbage but use his skill set of computers to remove errors in all E books across the world. Starting with ellipse a conic when it never was..
Kibo Parry M says keep NSF Dr.Panchanathan instead of throwing him out like a piece of garbage but use his skill set of computers to remove errors in all E books across the world.
On Tuesday, June 28, 2022 at 11:36:37 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
"not one single marble of commonsense in my entire brain"
"imp of physics"
tarded:
Kibo Parry M opines use NSF Dr.Panchanathan rather than replace him. Use his skill set of computers to electronically replace all E-books in all libraries, especially Colleges and Universities and High School libraries, where they have ellipse is a
And use that skill set to replace Boole Logic of AND truth table is TTTF not the horribly wrong TFFF which leads to the God Awful mistake of 2 OR 1 = 3 with AND as subtraction that colleges and universities now teach.the Cylinder is in fact a ellipse, but never in a cone.
And have Dr. Panchanathan's skill set in computers slip into the E-Books in all libraries around the world that of AP's geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
And finally slip into all physics and chemistry books, E books across the world, the question-- which is the atom's true electron-- the muon or the 0.5MeV particle.
Why fire and replace Dr. Panchanathan, when it is far better to use his skill set of replacing the junk and anti-science and errors by computer manipulation.
AP's Proof-Ellipse was never a Conic Section // Math proof series, book 1 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
Product detailsstruggle and waste time, decided to leave it frozen as is in pdf format. Any new news or edition of ellipse is never a conic in single cone is now done in this book. The last thing a scientist wants to do is wade and waddle through format, when all a
• ASIN : B07PLSDQWC
• Publication date : March 11, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 1621 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 20 pages
• Lending : Enabled
•
•
Proofs Ellipse is never a Conic section, always a Cylinder section and a Well Defined Oval definition//Student teaches professor series, book 5 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 14May2022. This is AP's 68th published book of science.
Preface: A similar book on single cone cut is a oval, never a ellipse was published in 11Mar2019 as AP's 3rd published book, but Amazon Kindle converted it to pdf file, and since then, I was never able to edit this pdf file, and decided rather than
In the course of 2019 through 2022, I have had to explain this proof often on Usenet, sci.math and sci.physics. And one thing that constant explaining does for a mind of science, is reduce the proof to its stripped down minimum format, to bare bonesskeleton proof. I can prove the slant cut in single cone is a Oval, never the ellipse in just a one sentence proof. Proof-- A single cone and oval have just one axis of symmetry, while a ellipse requires 2 axes of symmetry, hence slant cut is always a
Product detailsNot being modest, there has never been a valid proof of FTC until AP's 2015 proof. This also implies that only a geometry proof of FTC constitutes a valid proof of FTC.
• ASIN : B081TWQ1G6
• Publication date : November 21, 2019
• Language : English
• File size : 827 KB
• Simultaneous device usage : Unlimited
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Not Enabled
• Print length : 51 pages
• Lending : Enabled
#11-2, 11th published book
World's First Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus// Math proof series, book 2 Kindle Edition
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author)
Last revision was 15Dec2021. This is AP's 11th published book of science. Preface:
Actually my title is too modest, for the proof that lies within this book makes it the World's First Valid Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, for in my modesty, I just wanted to emphasis that calculus was geometry and needed a geometry proof.
Calculus needs a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. But none could ever be obtained in Old Math so long as they had a huge mass of mistakes, errors, fakes and con-artist trickery such as the "limit analysis". And very surprising thatmost math professors cannot tell the difference between a "proving something" and that of "analyzing something". As if an analysis is the same as a proof. We often analyze various things each and every day, but few if none of us consider a analysis as a
To give a Geometry Proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus requires math be cleaned-up and cleaned-out of most of math's mistakes and errors. So in a sense, a Geometry FTC proof is a exercise in Consistency of all of Mathematics. In order to prove aFTC geometry proof, requires throwing out the error filled mess of Old Math. Can the Reals be the true numbers of mathematics if the Reals cannot deliver a Geometry proof of FTC? Can the functions that are not polynomial functions allow us to give a
Cover Picture: Is my hand written, one page geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the world's first geometry proof of FTC, 2013-2015, by AP.
Product details
ASIN : B07PQTNHMY
Publication date : March 14, 2019
Language : English
File size : 1309 KB
Text-to-Speech : Enabled
Screen Reader : Supported
Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
X-Ray : Not Enabled
Word Wise : Not Enabled
Print length : 154 pages
Lending : Enabled
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #128,729 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
#2 in 45-Minute Science & Math Short Reads
#134 in Calculus (Books)
#20 in Calculus (Kindle Store)
Botfly of Math and Blowfly of Physics "Putin's stooge"
"wasn't bolted down too tight in the first place"
"Imp of Science"
"not one single marble of commonsense in my entire brain"
_And as the Baby Xi grew up from the rice paddies and reeds of Outer Manchuria, stolen by the Naxi and Zani Dictator Putin in Moscow, Xi
learned in school in chemical engineering that Taiwan was 1/28 the size
of Outer Manchuria, Emperor Qing's homeland, now occupied by homeless Russians drinking vodka, as Putin bombs Ukraine. And the nascent Xi orders
1,000 divisions to the Outer Manchuria border to regain back the stolen
Why Putin is 2X smarter than Xi as dictators// SCIENCE COUNCIL RULES EARTH, not petty dictators
2m views
the people have power, not one single idiot having power all his life time.If Putin pushes nuclear buttons, he drags down China along with Russia into a nuclear ash waste pile, and this means Xi is a inferior junior partner to Putin. Putin will drag down Xi's China, never the reverse.
So, one can look at the present situation on Earth and ask several logical questions about the 2 dictators of Putin's Russia and China's Xi.
It is little wonder that both Russia and China dictators are combative towards the West. Because dictators never want to give up on power but stay in power all their life long. So they oppose the West because the West has grown up to democracy-- let
Manchuria, some 28 times larger of a land mass than is Taiwan island. Yet there is Xi, spending so much time on wanting to invade Taiwan, when it is Outer Manchuria and Vladivostok (Haishenwai) that he should be focusing attention upon. And while PutinNaturally, Putin will want to keep the Russian people suppressed and have Russia be a second rate government as a dictator. Same goes for China-- they never want to give up power so the people themselves choose their leader.
But can we find differences in Putin and Xi themselves? Well in the West we call the Chinese inscrutable-- meaning -- little logical commonsense. And is this a valid description?? Yes of course, considering that Russia had stolen the lands of Outer
isomers and lead, and mercury and nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide from just living in that air polluted hellhole of Beijing. Xi studied chemistry and should know this. Whereas Putin likely detox..s every evening with breathing in pure oxygen at hisWhat does Xi do instead??? He focuses on Taiwan and befriends Russia. Why, at this rate, if Russia takes Inner Manchuria, we can expect Xi and the Chinese Communist Party to become even more loving of Russia for stealing more land of China.
And there is Xi, whose China has become rich with trading with the West, yet every day, Xi foaming at the mouth in hatred of the West.
So yes, Putin is 2X smarter as a dictator than is Xi, as if Putin has Xi in his side pocket.
Is there some scientific explanation as to why Xi is 2X dumber than Putin?? Perhaps, in that China is densely populated and the air pollution over all of China is worse than most countries. That Xi probably has 1/2 of his brain filled with CO and CO2
site after ICBMs wipe China off the map.This explains why Xi hates the West for not stealing any Chinese lands and making China rich in trade, while loving Putin for stealing Outer Manchuria, and proposing having Russia push nuclear buttons, making both Russia and China a nuclear waste
Xi's brain is full of air pollution toxins from the nasty Chinese air. They still build a new coal fired plant in China every day. The air in China is the worst air in the entire world.
Why Putin is 2X smarter than Xi as dictators// SCIENCE COUNCIL RULES EARTH, not petty dictators.
St.Petersburg █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity2/1, AP tards:
Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/2, AP tards:
Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/3, AP tards:
Every Russian missile fired into Ukraine met with a drone from Ukraine knocking out Moscow electric power lines
Give Ukraine drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/4, AP tards:
drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/9 (vacation?), AP tards:
drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/9, AP tards (again):
drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/10, AP tards:
drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/11, AP tards:
drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/12, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/12, AP tards again:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/13, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/14, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/15, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/16, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/17, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/18, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/19, AP tards:
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/20, AP tards:
Electricity out Novosibirsk &Volgograd█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/22, AP tards:
Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/23, AP tards:
Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/24, AP tards:
Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/25, AP tards:
Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
_drones █۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
2/26, AP tards:
Moscow electric blackout█۞█knock out Moscow electric power lines█۞█
St.Petersburg█۞█knock out St.Petersburg electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
On Saturday, April 1, 2023 at 9:15:06 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote: Banerjee, can your rail gun knock out St Petersburg electric lines???No.
On Saturday, April 1, 2023 at 9:15:06 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote: Banerjee, can your rail gun knock out St Petersburg electric lines???No.
On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 5:12:07 AM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote: something about electric power lines with Arindam's failure on rail guns
Moscow█۞█knock out St.Petersburg electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
Very sad to say, my new design rail gun has even less acceptibility to the powers that be than your plutonium universe, Archie.Why not????On Saturday, April 1, 2023 at 9:15:06 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:No.
Banerjee, can your rail gun knock out St Petersburg electric lines???
On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 5:12:07 AM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote: something about electric power lines with Arindam's failure on rail guns
Moscow█۞█knock out St.Petersburg electric power lines█۞█ Moscow, St.Petersburg, Volgograd, Vladivostok no electricity
Why not????On Saturday, April 1, 2023 at 9:15:06 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:No.
Banerjee, can your rail gun knock out St Petersburg electric lines???
Very sad to say, my new design rail gun has even less acceptibility to the powers that be than your plutonium universe, Archie.
On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 7:08:51 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
Very sad to say, my new design rail gun has even less acceptibility to the powers that be than your plutonium universe, Archie.
Is Arindam Banerjee fixing his rail gun to knock out St.Petersburg electric lines????
How does that rail gun work Arindam, you attach your Rail Gun to a electric line in a network and it destroys the entire network, even the source of power, by blowing up all the transformers in the network.
RAIL GUN that knocks out Moscow & St.Petersburg electricity, and here I thought it was going to be drones.
Bravo, Arindam finally makes good in physics, give Arindam the best Darjeeling tea to be found!!!! You take it with cream Arindam???
Sanjay Kumar,Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., ,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????Making money by teaching and spreading lies about Nature. The fraud comes from ignoring my discoveries about Nature, thus depriving all.Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the
cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a
inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
Subhas Sarkar
Annapurna Devi Yadav
Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
Sanjay Kumar
Saxena Vikrant,,Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck
cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a
Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
Subhas Sarkar
Annapurna Devi Yadav
Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
Sanjay Kumar
Constant daily spamming b.s. nonsense from Arindam Banerjee of his hatred of physics and physicists.
Indian Institute of TechnologyKedar B Khare, Khare Neeraj, Kumar Sunil, Malik H.K., Mani Brajesh Kumar, Marathe Rahul, Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S. , Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., Ravishankar V. , Reddy G.B. , Saxena Vikrant, Sengupta Amartya, Senthilkumaran P. ,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K.,
Physics dept. Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata, Bhatnagar M.C. , Chatterjee R., Chaudhary Sujeet, Das Pintu, Dhaka Rajendra S., Ghosh Joyee, Ghosh Pradipta, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar,
Sinha Aloka, Soni Ravi Kant,Annapurna Devi Yadav,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K.,Kanseri Bhaskar, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata. Hi professors of Indian Institute of Technology. Can any of you please remember when Arindam Banerjee was astudent of IIT (as he claims he was)?? And can you remember if he had his head up his arse in antiscience as he spams each and every day of the year in sci.physics, now????
Sanjay Kumar,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck insidedoing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????
2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee
unread,
All Nobel laureates in physics are mendacious nincompoops
As the believe in the law of conservation of energy. Energy gets created and destroyed in our
8:08 PM
Could the professors of IIT realize-- oh o, we have a fruitcake on our hands??? And was it the case that IIT just kept passing Arindam Banerjee up to higher grades just to get rid of the pest, when they should have failed him????
On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 7:08:51 PM UTC-5, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
Very sad to say, my new design rail gun has even less acceptibility to the powers that be than your plutonium universe, Archie.
Is Arindam Banerjee fixing his rail gun to knock out St.Petersburg electric lines????
How does that rail gun work Arindam, you attach your Rail Gun to a electric line in a network and it destroys the entire network, even the source of power, by blowing up all the transformers in the network.No way, Archie.
RAIL GUN that knocks out Moscow & St.Petersburg electricity, and here I thought it was going to be drones.
Bravo, Arindam finally makes good in physics, give Arindam the best Darjeeling tea to be found!!!! You take it with cream Arindam???
You sound like Gulliver before the King of Brobdingnag, proposing all sorts of horrid weaponry for victory in war.
The response from His Majesty was, as per Internet:
****
Based on Gulliver's descriptions of their behaviour, the King describes the English as "the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth".
****
You Americans are, of course, even more debased than the English of Swift's time.
The English since Swift have been improved with contact from the Brahmanical upper castes of India, but that has not happened to the other whites who could not get such contact.
Which is why, as debased English, you think I should be interested in doing evil stuff you lots are so good at.
Grow up, Archie. Don't be one among the most pernicious race of odious little vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????Sanjay Kumar,Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., ,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is
2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????Making money by teaching and spreading lies about Nature. The fraud comes from ignoring my discoveries about Nature, thus depriving all.Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing
a cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is
inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
Subhas Sarkar
Annapurna Devi Yadav
Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
Sanjay Kumar
Saxena Vikrant,,Dharmedra Pradhan-Ghosh Santanu,Kedar B Khare,Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar, Ghosh Sankalpa, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck
cool 1 degree Kelvin for superconductivity??)Mr. Pradhan is Arindam Banerjee typical and indicative of scientists at IIT, claiming the moon landing of Apollo 11 in 1969 was a staged hoax in the Arizona desert, along with other Banerjee (ball tingling notions-- the center of Earth and Sun is a
Why does India encourage whackos who hate science, to spam sci.physics every day with more spam.
Subhas Sarkar
Annapurna Devi Yadav
Rajkumar Ranjan Singh
Sanjay Kumar
Constant daily spamming b.s. nonsense from Arindam Banerjee of his hatred of physics and physicists.
Kedar B Khare, Khare Neeraj, Kumar Sunil, Malik H.K., Mani Brajesh Kumar, Marathe Rahul, Mehta B.R. , Mehta D.S. , Mishra Amruta, Muduli P.K., Ravishankar V. , Reddy G.B. , Saxena Vikrant, Sengupta Amartya, Senthilkumaran P. ,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K.,Indian Institute of Technology
Physics dept. Anurag Sharma, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata, Bhatnagar M.C. , Chatterjee R., Chaudhary Sujeet, Das Pintu, Dhaka Rajendra S., Ghosh Joyee, Ghosh Pradipta, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, Joseph Joby, Kanseri Bhaskar,
a student of IIT (as he claims he was)?? And can you remember if he had his head up his arse in antiscience as he spams each and every day of the year in sci.physics, now????Sinha Aloka, Soni Ravi Kant,Annapurna Devi Yadav,Shenoy M.R. , Shukla A.K.,Kanseri Bhaskar, Babu Sujin B, Banerjee Varsha, Bhattacharya Saswata. Hi professors of Indian Institute of Technology. Can any of you please remember when Arindam Banerjee was
inside doing the Faraday law because Arindam says you are "criminal bunglers". Personally I do not see where Arindam gets the criminality out of this????Sanjay Kumar,Dharmedra Pradhan,Kanseri Bhaskar,Kedar B Khare, Joseph Joby, Ghosh Sankalpa, Ghosh Santanu, of Indian Institute of Tech, is Arindam Banerjee correct when he says you cannot understand the hydrogen proton is 840MeV with a muon stuck
2Why Drs.V. Venkataraman, Arnab Rai Choudhuri of Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, cannot check to see if the real proton of Atoms is 840MeV with a muon stuck inside doing the Faraday law, as explained by Arindam they are "criminal bunglers".
Arindam Banerjee's profile photo
Arindam Banerjee
unread,
All Nobel laureates in physics are mendacious nincompoops
As the believe in the law of conservation of energy. Energy gets created and destroyed in our
8:08 PM
Could the professors of IIT realize-- oh o, we have a fruitcake on our hands??? And was it the case that IIT just kept passing Arindam Banerjee up to higher grades just to get rid of the pest, when they should have failed him????
Is A.Banerjee fixing his rail gun█۞█knock out St.Petersburg electric power lines█۞█ to knock out St.Petersburg electric lines????No. What can I do, it is part of the bigJew-gujJew world's Arindam-suppression strategy. No notice, thus, for me, Archie. You got more publicity that I, being a wiki celebrity. Not one of the legions of hungry journalists dares to come anywhere near me.
No relativity in your railgun, eh Arindam??
Spam mill echo chamber, that is Arindam Banerjee a decades long spammer of sci.physics with his hatred of science and the method of science. Hate, hate, anger and hate.
Is Arindam Banerjee the reason ITT fails to have a Nobel winner in chemistry or physics? Like Arindam, his hatred of science is glooming large with his constant hatred of science-- Apollo 11 was a staged hoax, Sun core is a frigid near 0 Kelvin, theman is a lunatic of science, perhaps reflecting why India fails to achieve science honors.
+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.
proton+muon. Thus, water molecule is not H2O but rather is H4O.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
oxygen and hydrogen".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
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
proportionality constant Z can be used:--- 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
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.
where H2 gets that expansion characteristic.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.
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?
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
mindless H+ as being hydrogen Atom of H2.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
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 oxygenThe 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
When water electrolysis is physics weighed, AP is confident that there are 4H per every one oxygen O. And that Water is truly H4O.
electrolysis of water.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.
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
properties of solid methane is discussed near 20.48K and...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.
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
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
My 250th published book.with date-time markers, and fact telling. And there are no problem sets. This book is intended for 1st year college. Until I include problem sets and exercises, I leave it to the professor and instructor to provide such. And also, chemistry is hugely a
TEACHING TRUE CHEMISTRY; H2 is the hydrogen Atom and water is H4O, not H2O// Chemistry
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) (Amazon's Kindle)
Prologue: This textbook is 1/2 research history and 1/2 factual textbook combined as one textbook. For many of the experiments described here-in have not yet been performed, such as water is really H4O not H2O. Written in a style of history research
Preface: This is my 250th book of science, and the first of my textbooks on Teaching True Chemistry. I have completed the Teaching True Physics and the Teaching True Mathematics textbook series. But had not yet started on a Teaching True Chemistrytextbook series. What got me started on this project is the fact that no chemistry textbook had the correct formula for water which is actually H4O and not H2O. Leaving the true formula for hydroxyl groups as H2O and not OH. But none of this is possible
Cover Picture: Sorry for the crude sketch work but chemistry and physics students are going to have to learn to make such sketches in a minute or less. Just as they make Lewis diagrams or ball & stick diagrams. My 4-5 minute sketch-work of the Watermolecule H4O plus the subatomic particle H, and the hydrogen atom H2. Showing how one H is a proton torus with muon inside (blue color) doing the Faraday law. Protons are toruses with many windings. Protons are the coils in Faraday law while muons are
Product details
• ASIN : B0CCLPTBDG
• Publication date : July 21, 2023
• Language : English
• File size : 788 KB
• Text-to-Speech : Enabled
• Screen Reader : Supported
• Enhanced typesetting : Enabled
• X-Ray : Not Enabled
• Word Wise : Enabled
• Sticky notes : On Kindle Scribe
• Print length : 168 pages
y z
| /
| /
|/______ x
Can_Srivastava Pankaj, Varshney R.K., Vijaya Prakash G. PLEASE step into a 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 tubeof 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
Can_Dr.Das Pintu,Dr.Shenoy M.R.,Dr.Bhatnagar M.C.,Dr.Chatterjee R., Dr.Chaudhary Sujeet, Indian Institute of Technology- please-step into the physics or chemistry lab and weigh the mass of Electrolysis Water, proving Water is H4O not H2O. Once weighedthe hydrogen test tube should be 1/4 the weight of the oxygen test tube for H4O but if mainstream chemistry is correct then 1/8 atomic mass units. My weighing scales do not go up to 0.00001 gram, and sure that Indian Institute Technology has far better
Spam mill echo chamber, that is Arindam Banerjee a decades long spammer of sci.physics with his hatred of science and the method of science. Hate, hate, anger and hate.
Is Arindam Banerjee reflective, a reflection of why India never has a Nobel prize in chemistry or physics, for schizophrenic type of behavior-- one moment doing physics-- rail gun, next moment shouting that Apollo 11 was a staged hoax in Arizona desertand that the Sun and Earth cores are a frigid near 0 Kelvin temperature. Maybe all of Indian physics and chemistry is like this-- one moment doing science-- next moment hating science.
Is Arindam Banerjee the reason ITT fails to have a Nobel winner in chemistry or physics?
Like Arindam, his hatred of science is glooming large with his constant hatred of science-- Apollo 11 was a staged hoax, Sun core is a frigid near 0 Kelvin, the man is a lunatic of science, perhaps reflecting why India fails to achieve science honors.
Those three robots did not even land on the moon, assuming they got there, and that is a reasonable assumption maybe.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 307 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 114:32:14 |
| Calls: | 6,854 |
| Files: | 12,355 |
| Messages: | 5,416,648 |