>>16841205
Here, you homunculus: https://archived.moe/b/thread/942166092/

>>16841231
The math is already posted, see the link above. Not doing it twice, was a lot of effort.

Once again:
>All you can do is question my character. You can't and never will address the actual material directly
&
>Maybe come up with some contrary mathematics?

Until either of those things happen, no one here has actually 'knocked me off the podium'- so to speak. Just thrown tomatoes and heckles from the side lines. No actual proponent of the contrary and a complete lack of diligence has been observed so far.