Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #413643

Univ of Western Ontario, a failed university with teachers like Dan Christensen attack dogs in sci.math, failures failures failures

Show all headers | View raw

Univ of Western Ontario, a failed university with teachers like Dan Christensen attack dogs in sci.math, failures failures failures

Pauline Barmby, Shantanu Basu, Peter Brown why fail along side that of failure Dan Christensen

On Tuesday, May 22, 2018 at 9:32:05 AM UTC-5, Dan Christensen wrote: 

Janusz Adamus, Justin Trudeau, Tatyana  Barron, Graham Denham, because corrosive Dan Christensen thinks 1 OR 2 = 3, when everyone knows 1 AND 2=3, never able to do true-Calculus or understand Proton = 840MeV 
5 posts by 4 authors   


Dear Justin Trudeau, your Dan Christensen is a pollution of education on all of Canada, teaching wacko science that 1 OR 3 = 4 , when even a 8 year old knows 1 AND 3 = 4. But little things like this, and ellipse is never a conic section but rather a cylinder section, and that the Sine wave in trig is not sinusoid but rather truly semicircle since 90 degrees is 1, means 180 degrees is 2, not 3.14... Mr. Trudeau, you yourself was a teacher at one time, and knows how important it is to not have a kook like Dan Christensen polluting the minds of young people. 

Does Canada have some laws of Stalking, for Dan has been a virulent stalker with his phony website on logic for over 5 years now. Dan just simply wants to attack people each and every day, and is a misfit and failure of math and science. You only have to open a few Dan Christensen posts to see there is nothing going on for him-- other than attack other persons. 

Mr Trudeau, can you please put a cork into the posting mouth of the stalker Dan Christensen. 

Dan Christensen wrote: 
3:30 PM (19 minutes ago) 
>The idiot troll Archie Pu never knows when to quit 

AP writes: Medicine does not yet have a pill to cure insane stalkers like Christensen but is working on it. 
Christensen-- they are all dumb, but you are not only dumb but insane stalker also, for to this very day you believe 1 OR 2 = 3, you believe an ellipse is a conic section, you believe sine is a sinusoid when in truth it is a semicircle wave, you believe harmonic series diverges when in reality it converges, you believe Calculus works by having rectangles of 0 width (see below). Worst of all you believe a proton is 938MeV and electron is .5MeV when in truth it is proton = 840 MeV and electron = 105 MeV where the .5MeV was Dirac's magnetic monopole. So, all of you are just plain dumb and ignorant about both math and physics. And Univ Western Ontario as a blight center when it has an insane idiot like you running around. 


Univ Western Ontario math dept 
Janusz Adamus, Tatyana  Barron,   Dan Christensen, Graham Denham 
*, Ajneet Dhillon, Matthias  Franz, John Jardine*, Massoud Khalkhali, Nicole Lemire, Jan Mináč, Victoria Olds, Martin Pinsonnault, Lex Renner, David Riley, Rasul Shafikov, Gordon Sinnamon 

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

   /\-------/\ 
   \::O:::O::/ 
  (::_  ^  _::) 
   \_`-----'_/ 
You mean the classroom is the world, not just my cubbyhole in Ontario? 
And, even though you-- professors of physics/math, want to remain silent and stupid in Real Electron = muon, Calculus your students deserve better. 


SEE PICTURE DIAGRAM of FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS below, professors hate teaching this for it shows their "limit calculus to be a joke" 

PICTURE DIAGRAM OF FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS 

By April 2015, was there for the first time a picture diagram proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, FTC, not just an analysis argument, but a geometry proof (see below). Old Math could never assemble a picture diagram of the FTC. All they could do is argue with limit concept an analysis argument, never a geometry proof of FTC. 

A picture diagram proof of FTC changes all of calculus and thus, changes all of mathematics for it requires a infinity borderline to produce an actual number for the  infinitesimal, and that number is the inverse of the infinity borderline. Requiring a infinity borderline to produce the infinitesimal changes all of mathematics, and throwing out the limit concept. By changing all of Calculus and thus correcting mathematics, all of math before 2015 was just trash math. 

Picture Diagram needed for Fundamental Theorem of Calculus 

Why no continuum and no curves exist in Math, so that the Calculus 
can exist, and does exist 

by Archimedes Plutonium 

Calculus is based upon there being Grid points in geometry, no 
continuum, but actually, empty space between two neighboring points. 
This is called Discrete geometry, and in physics, this is called 
Quantum Mechanics. In 10 Grid, the first few numbers are 0, .1, .2, 
.3, etc. That means there does not exist any number between 0 and .1, 
no number exists between .1 and .2. Now if you want more precise 
numbers, you go to a higher Grid like that of 100 Grid where the first 
few numbers are 0, .01, .02, .03, etc. 

Calculus in order to exist at all, needs this empty space between 
consecutive numbers or successor numbers. It needs that empty space so 
that the integral of calculus is actually small rectangles whose 
interior area is not zero. So in 10 Grid, the smallest width of any 
Calculus rectangle is of width .1. In 100 Grid the smallest width is 
.01. 

But, this revolutionary understanding of Calculus does not stop with 
the Integral, for having empty space between numbers, means no curves 
in math exist, but are ever tinier straight-line segments. 

It also means, that the Derivative in Calculus is part and parcel of 
the function graph itself. So that in a function such as y = x^2, the 
function graph is the derivative at a point. In Old Math, they had the 
folly and idiocy of a foreign, alien tangent line to a function graph 
as derivative. In New Math, the derivative is the same as the function 
graph itself. And, this makes commonsense, utter commonsense, for the 
derivative is a prediction of the future of the function in question, 
and no way in the world can a foreign tangent line to a point on the 
function be able to predict, be able to tell where the future point of 
that function be. The only predictor of a future point of a function, 
is the function graph itself. 

If the Calculus was done correctly, conceived correctly, then a 
minimal diagram explains all of Calculus. Old Math never had such a 
diagram, because Old Math was in total error of what Calculus is, and 
what Calculus does. 

The fundamental picture of all of Calculus are these two of a 
trapezoid and rectangle. In fact, call the picture, the 

FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS, Picture 

Trapezoid for derivative as the roof-top of 
the trapezoid, which must be a straight-line segment. If it is curved, 
you cannot fold it down to form a integral rectangle. And the 
rectangle for integral as area. 

From this: 
        B 
        /| 
      /  | 
 A /----| 
  /      | 
|        | 
|____| 


The trapezoid roof has to be a straight-line segment (the derivative) 
so that it can be hinged at A, and swiveled down to form rectangle for 
integral. 

To this: 

______ 
|         | 
|         | 
|         | 
--------- 

And the derivative of x= A, above is merely the dy/dx involving points 
A and B. Thus, it can never be a curve in Calculus. And the AB is part 
of the function graph itself. No curves exist in mathematics and no 
continuum exists in mathematics. 

In the above we see that CALCULUS needs and requires a diagram in 
which you can go from derivative to integral, or go from integral to 
derivative, by simply a hinge down to form a rectangle for area, or a 
hinge up to form the derivative from a given rectangle. 

Why in Old Math could no professor of math ever do the Calculus 
Diagram? Why? The answer is simple, no-one in Old Math pays attention 
to Logic, and that no-one in Old Math was required to take formal 
Logic when they attended school. So a person bereft of Logic, is never 
going to find mistakes of Logic and think clear and think straight. 

by Archimedes Plutonium 
------------------ 
------------------- 



Proofs that the Real Electron=muon, Real Proton=840MeV, and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall 

12 PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon 
by Archimedes Plutonium 

Proofs that the Real Electron=muon and that the .5MeV particle was the magnetic monopole, afterall 
> 
PROOFS that Real-Electron = muon 

1st proof is chemical bonding cannot exist with momentum of 938 versus .5MeV 
Chemical Bonds are covalent, ionic, metallic. You simply cannot get atoms to bond if the electron is thought of as the .5MeV particle, only with a muon at 105 MeV and the proton at 840 MeV with neutron at 945 MeV do you have the physics of angular momentum that allows bonding in Chemistry. The .5MeV particle was, all along a magnetic monopole of a photon with .5 MeV charge energy, not rest mass energy. 

AP 

Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Univ of Western Ontario, a failed university with teachers like Dan Christensen attack dogs in sci.math, failures failures failures Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 10:35 -0700
  Re: Extreme math failure, Archie Pu Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2018-05-23 14:54 -0700
  Re: Univ of Western Ontario, a failed university with teachers like Dan Christensen attack dogs in sci.math, failures failures failures moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-24 00:36 +0000

csiph-web