Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #720453 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-12-23 14:10 -0800 |
| Last post | 2018-12-24 23:20 +0000 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Report of LOCKDOWN of HARVARD UNIV until they get a Logic textbook that teaches TRUE LOGIC with various reporters and fictional reporters: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-12-23 14:10 -0800
Re: Archimedes "Village Idiot" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-12-24 23:20 +0000
| From | Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-12-23 14:10 -0800 |
| Subject | Report of LOCKDOWN of HARVARD UNIV until they get a Logic textbook that teaches TRUE LOGIC with various reporters and fictional reporters: |
| Message-ID | <c2475716-d61f-422d-8d73-6c8965301c15@googlegroups.com> |
Report of LOCKDOWN of HARVARD UNIV until they get a Logic textbook that teaches TRUE LOGIC with various reporters and fictional reporters:
AP; what is the news today at Harvard, Moose, are the students finally gaining control over these moneygrubs who want to continue teaching Logic Idiocies of AND with OR, or is the redneck filthy moneygrubs like Dan Christensen still lording over these innocent students and their parents with 5 OR 2 = 7 ??
Reporter Micky Moose: No, like some students parents are angry as hell and not going to take it anymore that they send their children to College to learn the truth and pay $50,000 a year and being forced to learn nonsense like 2 OR 1 = 3 with 2 AND 1 = 1, is enough to drive any parent up the wall in arms.
AP: ah, here is a student now, please tell the camera why you are protesting at Harvard Commons.
Harvard student: absolutely, I am a sophomore wanting to be a medical doctor and I expect the College Experience to be about the TRUTH of the world, not for some redneck creep like Christensen to be skimming off the dollars from his fakery of 2 OR 1 = 3, just so he stays in plosh money, while we have to memorize that nonsense and be tested on worthless crap and fakery, just so rednecks sell their books, no, no. We as students want to learn truth, of the truth and nothing but the truth.
AP: you mean like if you want to be a Medical Doctor and you come to Harvard and the teacher foists upon you the Humor medicine that is yellow bile, black bile, phlegm and blood, instead of true medical science.
Harvard student: exactly right, Harvard in Math and Logic is a throw back to medicine when they thought that Leeches were a cure to disease. And I will be damned if ever a Dan Christensen forces me to accept his idiocy of 2 OR 1 = 3 just so he can parasitize me and make money off of me.
AP: okay, okay, here is loud mouth Moroney aka kibo from Boston's loud mouth press reporting on the Harvard Lockdown. Why are you here in cold Harvard grounds today?
On Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 4:43:33 PM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> What, you don't even heat your trailer?
AP: So, kibo shein barry Moroney, you are admiring of the Trailer like Architecture of the Harvard buildings, but let us get back to the Lockdown, why do you think the students are so adamant against money grubs of Logic who preach and teach anti-logic
Moroney: > >always at 100% charge even in cold weather.
> after a night of cold weather is near 3%
> >charge.
>
AP: have you no mercy for students wanting to learn, Moroney and Christensen, and you want to charge them a full 100% for fake logic textbooks with their 20 OR 10 = 30. Where is the mercy in that?
Moroney : > Math Failure
> >always at 100% charge even in cold weather.
> after a night of cold weather is near 3%
> >charge.
>
AP: so your saying the students are failures and deserve to be charged for buying fake logic textbooks with 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1
Moroney: >Are you actually trying to
> imitate the dead guy Boole who was too stoopid to come out of the rain,
AP: yes we all know the father of modern logic was a village idiot when it comes to "thinking in logic" for Boole thought the cure to pneumona was to get more cold with his wife wetting the bed Boole slept in.
Moroney: >by
> having no heat in a South Dakota winter???
AP: hold on, I was not aware that Harvard had a extension out in the Dakotas, what are they experimenting on corn or soybeans?
Moroney: >How dumb and stoopid is that?
AP: oh, so your Logic and Christensen's logic is to put heat out in South Dakota winters and you hope to achieve that with a 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1 logic. And here I thought your logic was just to parasitize young students and rake off the money.
AP: And there you have our coverage of LOCKDOWN HARVARD, be back in an hour or so,,,,,,
Moroney reporting on LOCKDOWN at Harvard until they can get a true book of LOGIC, rather than brainwash and pollute the minds of students just so some moneygrub rednecks like Christensen makes more money
On Saturday, December 22, 2018 at 8:34:52 AM UTC-6, Dan Christensen wrote:
> Dan
>
> Download my DC Proof 2.0 ,,,,
> Visit my Math Blog at ,,,,,
(snip the moneygrub spam of Christensen trying to enrich his pockets with his fakery 5 OR 1 = 6 with 5 AND 1= 4 and polluting the minds of students in logic
Dan Christensen (the spamming Canadian of 6 years bullying) wrote on 20Dec2018
8:19 AM (11 hours ago)
>WARNING TO PARENTS IN CLAY COUNTY SD: AP wants your children to fail in school and to worship his pagan Atom God Pu
>Archie Pu's fake logic
A B A & B
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F
>Real logic:
A B A & B
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F
A B A OR B
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F
>AP's fake math:
“The last and largest finite number is 10^604.”
--June 3, 2015
>Dan Christensen, 6 year insane stalker Canadian
Michael Moroney, stalker meathead reporter on the Harvard Lockdown until they get some true books of Logic, not the Boole b.s. of 3 OR 2 = 5 with 3 AND 2 = 1
..
.- " `-. ,..-''' ```....'`-..
, . `.' ' `.
.' .' ` ` ' `.. ;
. ; .' . `. ;
; . ' `. . '
. ' ` `. |
. '. '
. 0 0 ' `.
' `
; `
.' `
; U `
; '; `
: | ;.. :` `
: `;. ```. .-; | '
'. ` ``.., .' :' '
; ` ;'.. ..-'' ' ' I am airhead Moroney, so dumb I think chemistry bonding can exist with proton 938MeV & electron at .5MeV equally as dumb as my idea that Boole logic is valid as 10 OR 4 = 14 with 10 AND 4 = 6, when a 8 year old knows 10 AND 4= 14
` ` ; ````'''""' ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` ` ; ; ' '
` `. ````'''''' ' '
` . ' '
/ ` `. ' ' .
/ ` .. ..' .'"""""...'
/ .` ` ``........-' .'` .....'''
/ .'' ; ` .' `
...'.' ; .' ` .' `
"" .' .' | ` .; \ `
; .' | `. . . . ' . \ `
:' | ' ` , `. `
| ' ` ' `. `
` ' ` ; `. |
`.' ` ; `-'
`...'
Moroney math failure, here is where the fool thinks 938 is short of 945 by 12%, and he pretends he is an electrical engineer. Perhaps the first e.e. in the world that cannot do a percentage correctly
On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:30:22 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Silly boy, that's off by more than 12.6 MeV, or 12% of the mass of a muon.
> Hardly "exactly" 9 muons.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:52:21 AM UTC-6, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Or, 938.2720813/105.6583745 = 8.88024338572. A proton is about the mass
> of 8.88 muons, not 9. About 12% short.
President: L. Reif (electrical engineer)
MIT physics dept
William Bertozzi, Robert Birgeneau, Hale Bradt, Bernard Burke, George Clark , Jeffrey Goldstone, Thomas Greytak, Lee Grodzins , Paul Joss, Vera Kistiakowsky, Earle Lomon, Irwin Pless, Paul Schechter, James Young
Drs.Larry Summers, Sheldon Glashow, Lisa Randall of Harvard, teach percentages correctly-- Moroney//never realizing the Real Electron = muon, proton=840MeV, .5MeV = Dirac's monopole
Harvard Physics dept
Jacob Barandes, Howard Berg, Michael Brenner, Adam Cohen, Eugene Demler, Michael Desai
Louis Deslauriers, John Doyle, Cora Dvorkin, Gary Feldman, Douglas Finkbeiner, Melissa Franklin, Gerald Gabrielse, Howard Georgi, Sheldon Glashow, Roy Glauber, Jene Golovchenko, Markus Greiner, Roxanne Guenette, Girma Hailu, Bertrand Halperin, Lene Hau
Thomas Hayes, Eric Heller, Jason Hoffman, Jenny Hoffman, Gerald Holton, Paul Horowitz, John Huth, Arthur Jaffe, Daniel Jafferis, Efthimios Kaxiras, Philip Kim, John Kovac, Erel Levine
Mikhail Lukin, Logan McCarty, L. Mahadevan, Vinothan Manoharan, Eric Mazur, Masahiro Morii
David Morin, Julia Mundy, Cherry Murray, David Nelson, Kang Ni, Hongkun Park, William Paul
Peter Pershan, Mara Prentiss, Lisa Randall, Matthew Reece, Subir Sachdev, Aravinthan Samuel, Matthew Schwartz, Irwin Shapiro, Isaac Silvera, Andrew Strominger, Christopher Stubbs, Cumrun Vafa, Ronald Walsworth, David Weitz, Robert Westervelt, Richard Wilson
Tai Wu, Amir Yacoby, Susanne Yelin, Xi Yin
/\-------/\
\::O:::O::/
(::_ ^ _::)
\_`-----'_/
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Boston?
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 13:24:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Partial List of the World's Crackpot Logicians-- should be in a
college Abnormal-Psychology department, not Logic// Peter Bruce Andrews,
Lennart Aqvist, Hendrik Pieter Barendregt, John Lane Bell, Irving Copi,
Michael Withey, Patrick Hurley et al.
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 21:24:38 +0000
Partial List of the World's Crackpot Logicians-- should be in a college Abnormal-Psychology department, not Logic// Peter Bruce Andrews, Lennart Aqvist, Hendrik Pieter Barendregt, John Lane Bell, Irving Copi, Michael Withey, Patrick Hurley et al.
Partial List of the World's Crackpot Logicians-- should be in a college Abnormal-Psychology department, not Logic// Peter Bruce Andrews, Lennart Aqvist, Hendrik Pieter Barendregt, John Lane Bell, Irving Copi, Michael Withey, Patrick Hurley, Harry J Gensler, David Kelley, Jesse Bollinger, Theodore Sider, David Barker-Plummer, I. C. Robledo, John Nolt, Peter Smith, Stan Baronett, Jim Holt, Virginia Klenk, David Agler, Susanne K. Langer, Gary M. Hardegree, Raymond M. Smullyan, John Venn, William Gustason, Richmond H. Thomason, partial list for now.
All of them are clowns of logic, although they have interest in logic, none are past a baby stage understanding of what Logic is. They are all worse than the fool George Boole. All of them are a disgrace to the subject we call Logic. All of them are in the same boat as George Boole-- catching pneumonia and then having his wife douse him in bed with cold freezing water and taking cold showers-- thinking that combatting pneumonia is done by getting colder.
All of the above listed should never be allowed to teach their nonsense and pollute the minds of youngsters with their crazy 9 OR 5 = 14 with 9 AND 5 = 4, all because a crazy Boole with Jevons in the 1800s thought that OR was add and AND was subtract. All because a true logician has more than a microgram brain of Logic in his head, and realizes that if you had a string of statements, say 10 statements and if just one single statement of those ten is true, makes the entire set of 10 to be true also, regardless of the truth value of the other 9 statements. Said in a different manner, if you have a truth of a single statement, and, no matter how you surround that single statement with 9 other statements, regardless of their truth value, because of the truth of the one statement makes the combined all 10 statements have a true value.
The stupid microgram brain of Boole and Jevons in the subject of Logic (witness their history with pneumonia) is not a Logic at all, for it leads to the incredibly stupid formulation that 3 AND 2 = 1 with 3 OR 2 = 5. Yes, those two logical idiots Boole and Jevons and every idiot of Logic since those two, have thought the truth table of AND was TFFF, when according to a real true logical person-- you need just 1 true statement to make a compound statements as a whole be true. So the true true truth table of AND was TTTF. And this makes sense in the above idiots of Logic with their OR, so confused were those idiots that they combined a "or" with an "and" and generated a "inclusive or" of TTTF. I mean what clowns are these? Who think that OR has to be compounded or a composite of "and", with "or" forming the idiot idea of an "inclusive or" and, not even realizing that you no longer have a primitive-connector. The true truth table of OR is exclusive and is FTTF, which is subtraction in mathematics.
Inclusive OR, INCLUSIVE OR, is the invention of an idiot of logic, pure slab of bonehead worthless bonehead of Logic, for the "inclusive or" is a village idiot mind that stacks together the OR and the AND all into one idiotic product of Either ,,Or,, Or Both. Not an accident waiting to happen in Logic, a multiple chain collision on the expressway is the Either Or Or Both. It is not a primitive logical Connector that the 4 primitive logic Connectors need to be, no, the Either Or Or Both is already a fool's built compound connector pretending to be primitive connector. A village idiot of the 1800s like George Boole and his compatriot Jevons would not have enough of a logical mind to see that Either Or Or Both is a compound piece of worthless nonsense. Even a 8 year old can see that Either Or Or Both is a compounded piece of crap and has no business of being in Logic primitive connectors.
To be in Logic, you need a Logical Mind to even do logic, and to come up with a SELF CONTRACTION in terms like it is updown or it is overeasy-hard, is the same as Inclusive-Or, a term and idea that is a self-contradiction. Logic is about staying away from contradiction. And here, starting with Boole and Jevons, they built their logic on a Contradiction of the inclusive-or. It would be like at the Olympics in the 100 meter dash, at the sound of the gun, a runner, instead of going forwards, goes backwards in running step in the dash, not to the finish line but to oblivion running backwards.
So, please stop torturing the brains and minds of our young students just because you are a clown of microgram brain of logic. And throw out all the OLD LOGIC textbooks for they are not learning or teaching but brainwashing by polluting moneygrub creeps.
#1 first comes Logic-- think straight and clear which many math professors are deaf dumb and blind to
My corrections of Old Logic have a history that dates before 1993, sometime around 1991, I realized the Euclid proof of infinitude of primes was illogical, sadly sadly wrong, in that the newly formed number by "multiply the lot and add 1" was necessarily a new prime in the indirect proof method. So that my history of fixing Old Logic starts in 1991, but comes to a synthesis of correcting all four of the connectors of Equal/not, And, Or, If->Then, by 2015.
Newsgroups: sci.math
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 17:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: which term to chose-- indeterminate, undefined, indefinite,
undecidable, probabilistic
From: Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium....@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:32:38 +0000
So, my special talented gift as a scientist, is my superior logic abilities over all other humans. I am the closest being to that of the sci fi movie of Spock (Mr. Logic) in Star Trek as any human has ever gone before. All of my progress in physics, science, math, is that I have a superior ability of logical thinking, blessed by the Gods of 231Pu.
History of AP Logic starts with 1991 and culminates with New Logic that replaces Old Logic by 2015. Old Logic is like comparing a flat earth theory to a true round earth theory.
Before you do Mathematics, you need to be able to think correctly, straight and clear. Unfortunately schools across the world do not teach proper true Logic. They teach a mish mash gaggle of error filled garbage and call it Logic.
The 4 connectors of Logic are:
1) Equal (equivalence) plus Not (negation) where the two are combined as one
2) And (conjunction)
3) Or (exclusive or) (disjunction)
4) Implication
New Logic
EQUAL/NOT table:
T = T = T
T = not F = T
F = not T = T
F = F = T
Equality must start or begin logic because in the other connectors, we
cannot say a result equals something if we do not have equality built
already. Now to build equality, it is unary in that T=T and F =F. So
we need another unary connector to make equality a binary. Negation is
that other connector and when we combine the two we have the above
table.
Equality combined with Negation allows us to proceed to build the
other three logic connectors.
Now, unfortunately, Logic must start with equality allied with
negation and in math what this connector as binary connector ends up
being-- is multiplication for math. One would think that the first
connector of Logic that must be covered is the connector that ends up
being addition of math, not multiplication. But maybe we can find a
philosophy-logic answer as to why Logic starts with equal/not and is
multiplication rather than addition. That explanation is of course the Space in which the Logic operators govern, and the full space is area, so that is multiplication. And we see that in a geometry diagram
T T
T T where all four small squares are T valued making a 4 square
While addition is and with a Space like this
T T
T F and we have just 3 of the 4 smaller squares covered by addition.
Here you we have one truth table equal/not whose endresult is 4 trues and now we move on to AND as addition.
New Logic
AND
T & T = T
T & F = T
F & T = T
F & F = F
AND is ADD in New Logic, and that makes a whole lot of common sense.
AND feels like addition, the joining of parts. And the truth table for
AND should be such that if given one true statement in a series of
statements then the entire string of statements is true. So if I had P
and Q and S and R, I need only one of those to be true to make the
string true P & Q & S & R = True if just one statement is true.
The truth table of AND results in 3 trues and 1 false.
New Logic
OR(exclusive)
T or T = F
T or F = T
F or T = T
F or F = F
OR is seen as a choice, a pick and choose. So if I had T or T, there
is no choice and so it is False. If I had T or F there is a choice and
so it is true. Again the same for F or T, but when I have F or F,
there is no choice and so it is false. OR in mathematics, because we
pick and discard what is not chosen, that OR is seen as subtraction.
OR is a truth table whose endresult is 2 trues, 2 falses.
New Logic
IMPLIES (Material Conditional)
IF/THEN
MOVES INTO
T -> T = T
T -> F = F
F -> T = U probability outcome
F -> F = U probability outcome
A truth table that has a variable which is neither T or F, but U for
unknown or a probability outcome. We need this U so that we can do
math where 0 divided into something is not defined.
Now notice there are four truth tables where the endresult is 4 trues,
3 trues with 1 false, 2 trues with 2 falses and finally a truth table
with a different variable other than T or F, with variable U. This is
important in New Logic that the four primitive connectors, by
primitive I mean they are independent of one another so that one
cannot be derived by the other three. The four are axioms,
independent. And the way you can spot that they are independent is
that if you reverse their values so that 4 trues become 4 falses. For
AND, reversal would be FFFT instead of TTTF. For OR, a reversal would
be TFFT instead of FTTF.
To be independent and not derivable by the other three axioms you need
a condition of this:
One Table be 4 of the same
One Table be 3 of the same
One Table be 2 of the same
And to get division by 0 in mathematics, one table with a unknown variable.
So, how did Old Logic get it all so wrong so bad? I think the problem
was that in the 1800s when Logic was being discovered, is that the
best minds of the time were involved in physics, chemistry, biology
and looked upon philosophy and logic as second rate and that second
rate minds would propose Old Logic. This history would be from Boole
1854 The Laws of Thought, and Jevons textbook of Elementary Lessons on
Logic, 1870. Boole started the Old Logic with the help of Jevons and
fostered the wrong muddleheaded idea that OR was ADD, when it truly is
AND.
Now the way people actually live, is an indicator of how well they
thought and how well any of their ideas should be taken seriously. In
the case of Boole, he went to class in a downpour rain, why without a
raincoat? And reaching class, instead of changing into dry warm
clothes, stood for hours in front of students, sopping wet and
shivering. Of course he caught pneumonia, but instead of being
sensible, common sense that even a fly would have, he insisted his
wife give him cold showers and make the bed all wet and freezing. Of
course, he would die from this. Now, does anyone today, think that a
mind like that has anything to offer Logic or mathematics, is as crazy
as what Boole was.
But once you have textbooks about Logic, it is difficult to correct a
mistake because of the money making social network wants to make more
money, not go around fixing mistakes. So this nightmarish mistakes of
the truth tables was not seen by Frege, by Russell, by Whitehead, by
Carnap, by Godel, and by 1908 the symbols and terminology of the Old
Logic truth tables were so deeply rooted into Logic, that only a
Logical minded person could ever rescue Logic.
1.1 The "and" truth table should be TTTF not what Boole thought TFFF.
Only an utter gutter mind of logic would think that in a series of
statements, that AND is true when all statements are true, but to the
wise person-- he realizes that if just one statement is true, the
entire series is true, where we toss aside all the irrelevant and
false statements --(much what life itself is-- we pick out the true
ones and ignore all the false ones). In fact, in a proof in mathematics, the proof can be full of false and nonsense statements, so long as the proof itself is there and be seen as overall True. For example the proof of SAS in geometry, side angle side, can be packed with false statements and irrelevant statements and still be true.
1.2 The error of "if-then" truth table should be TFUU, not that of TFTT
1.3 The error of "not" and "equal", neither unary, but should be binary
1.4 The error that Reductio Ad Absurdum is a proof method, when it is
merely probability-truth, not guaranteed
1.5 The error, the "or" connector is truth table FTTF, never that of TTTF, for the idea of an inclusive "or", --- either A or B or both, is a self contradiction. And funny, how the fathers of Logic-- Boole and Jevons had a connector that was self contradictory, as if the fathers of logic had no logical mind to be doing logic in the first place.
1.6 So that begs the question, what in mathematics has a truth table of TFFF. Well the simple answer is that it is a reverse of TTTF which is AND, and so the former can be got by that of a NOT function on AND. But in isolation, what is a table of TFFF in mathematics? My guess is it is Absolute Value, a form of Absolute Value in mathematics, but that is only a guess. In 2016 I gave a half hearted argument that TFFF was absolute value.
Very crude dot picture of 5f6, 94TH
ELECTRON=muon DOT CLOUD of 231Pu
::\ ::|:: /::
::\::|::/::
_ _
(:Y:)
- -
::/::|::\::
::/ ::|:: \::
One of those dots is the Milky Way galaxy. And each dot represents another galaxy.
. \ . . | . /.
. . \. . .|. . /. .
..\....|.../...
::\:::|::/::
--------------- -------------
--------------- (Y) -------------
--------------- --------------
::/:::|::\::
../....|...\...
. . /. . .|. . \. .
. / . . | . \ .
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
I re-opened the old newsgroup PAU of 1990s and there one can read my recent posts without the hassle of spammers, off-topic-misfits, front-page-hogs, stalking mockers, suppression-bullies, and demonizers.
Read my recent posts in peace and quiet.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!forum/plutonium-atom-universe
Archimedes Plutonium
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-12-24 23:20 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Archimedes "Village Idiot" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test |
| Message-ID | <pvrpk6$dbl$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #720453 |
Math Failure Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> fails: >Subject: Re: my history of No Negative Numbers exist is evidence that the mind is a Brain Locus theory Re: summary glance overview of my history that No Negative Numbers Exist >And in the Quantum Numbers of N, L, m_L and m_s those are easily dealt >with by positive numbers only. Except for that pesky m_L, which ranges from -L to +L. And m_s which is either +1/2 or -1/2. FAIL.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web