A précis for this website, our world, and our universe

Left Yellow Arrow
Right Yellow Arrow



Why is there so much trouble in our little world?
Ans: Our little worldviews need the universe.

by Bruce E. Camber
Related: WorldThe ThreeHistoryExpansionFirst InstantConsciousnessPerfections

Nations are people; and, all people are in process. No one has all the answers. Surely, there are plenty of very smart people, but we are all still just people. Our leaders are just people, too. Like the rest of us, they have deep insecurities and huge gaps of knowledge …a recipe for problems!

Throughout our common history, we make many major assumptions. None of these assumptions should ever become sacrosanct. Working on our ideas and concepts never stops. Updating and improving is the essence of life! Notwithstanding, over the years our greatest scholars have made mistakes and sometimes, their students (our scholars) repeat those mistakes for too many years.

Significant Mistake by Aristotle
Ten Full Tetrahedrons Pictured

Perhaps the most egregious mistake by a great scholar is Aristotle’s claim that we can perfectly tile and tessellate the universe with tetrahedrons.1 One might respond, “So what, ho hum. Just a bit technical.” No, it’s a simple but key geometry; one face of the tetrahedrons perfectly covers a surface with no spaces. The flip side (noted by ten triangular peaks demarcated by the red dots within the image on right) cannot be perfectly filled with another layer of tetrahedrons. Therefore, Aristotle’s claim was wrong. It was a mistake and it was promoted for over 1800 years; and today, it is very rarely discussed.2

Today, it seems that we diss simple geometries and we do not grasp basic geometric structures.3

Continuity, Symmetry, and Harmony

Our most important failing: Please think about our oh-so-old, most-ubiquitous, most-studied pi. Mathematics and physics would be dead without it, yet you won’t find it within our concepts about the beginnings of this universe. Today, we tend to fool around with pi.4 If we took it more seriously, we would ask questions about spheres like Lemaître’s primeval atom,5 Wheeler’s geon,6 Pati & Salam’s preon,7 and those defined by the Planck base units.8 We would prioritize the study of the definition of continuity implied by those “never-ending, never-repeating” numbers. We would engage its manifold symmetries and the relations between lines and circles and spheres. We’d be going inside the sphere to study the types of harmony that manifest and the unique dynamics of each.9

These are failings in our time. These are also the failings of our great minds-and-scholars and our leaders; and these failings affect the way we see our universe, our world, each other, and ourselves. The key insight of this article is that we are deeply and profoundly related, connected, and interconnected. If that simple fact was embraced as a fact, we just might be more respectful of each other and be more creative as we engage each other just as we are.

We started working on our chart, a model of this universe on December 19, 2011 in New Orleans …in.a.high.school geometry class. There are 202 progressive doublings of the Planck base units to this day and size of our universe. That chart stretches credulity. It is so hard to believe, we’ve asked many great scholars for advice and criticism. We received modest encouragement, no endorsements, and no constructive criticism. Undeterred, we’ve continued on; and, each year the concepts simply become ever so much more rich and encouraging. We even set about critically reviewing “commonsense” worldviews like our understanding of space and time. We had the audacity to question Newton and to support his rival, Leibniz.10 Then, rather naively, we even challenged Stephen Hawking and his understanding of the first moment of space and time. Hawking had an infinitely-hot start. Ours is rather cool!11

A basic idea emerged; an infinitesimal sphere is always the first notation and a simple start.12 And, the universe is populated by infinitesimal spheres with a remarkable interiority.13 A whole new sense of space and time emerged. A whole new physics of interiority began to emerge. The universe was filled with these spheres, quite literally filling all space and time. These infinitesimal spheres are in everything, everywhere, throughout all time. Each is like a little recording device. Everything you say, do, think or feel, is encapsulated, noted, and footnoted!14

Everything matters. Historically, such a construction may naturally give rise to an understanding of the Akasha,15 a concept that is within the beliefs of Buddhists, Confucians, Hindus, Jains, Taoists, and other sects that lift up Wuji philosophies. Yes, within each belief system, there is a record for everything. In other traditions an analogy would be omniscience.

Our model may be simple, yet it is inclusive. It opens a “huge” domain, 64-to-67 doublings that are infinitesimal and can’t be reached by our measuring devices. So small it just might be the basis of a new science for systems theory and a beginning for complexity theory. It is a domain for string theory and has plenty of character to include Langlands programs and even the most oblique and abstract mathematics.16

Yes, everything starts simple. We all do; and to our simplicity we must humbly return if this world is not to collapse with the weight of people who are much too sure of their ideas and actions.


Introduction. Not many people in this world have visited this website. This section is for those who are feeling a bit lost. Our concepts and language always need clarification. We hope that our first-time visitors will find it here.

[1] Aristotle’s Mistake: In 2015, my life changed because I came upon a reference to an article titled, Mysteries in Packing Regular Tetrahedra.” That article amazed me. It took over 1800 years to catch Aristotle’s mistake. Yet, along that way, Averroës (Abu al-WalidMohammad ibn Ahmad al Rushd (1126–1198), Leonardo of Pisa (Fibonacci) (c. 1228), Roger Bacon (c. 1214–1294), and Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225–1274) were among the greats of their time who reinforced his mistake. As a result, none of them would ever know about a most fundamental geometric gap. First, inferred by Johannes Müller von Königsberg (1436–1476), then documented in 1480 by Paul of Middelburg, a professor of astrology in Padua, the discussion was rebirthed by Dirk Struik (MIT) in 1926 while studying in Rome. Most recently, in December 2012, Jeffrey C. Lagarias and Chuanming Zong [also see, May 2020] brought it to life again. Yet, none of these people in their time contemplating that gap ever thought that it just might opened a path to quantum fluctuations, indeterminacy, and imperfection. Such a highly-speculative statement would appear to most physicists today to be uninformed. I do not believe that I would be overplaying my hand to say that this gap makes us all equally human. It is the beginnings of all our imperfections.

[2] Over 1800 Years to Catch a Simple Mistake: We all make mistakes, yet we are not Aristotle, Averroës, Bacon, or Aquinas. Some of our Nobel laureates might come close. Then there are others like Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose. Nobody is exempt; we all make plenty of mistakes. Admitting our fallibility is the beginning of intellectual integrity, but unfortunately, the need of our cultures throughout time for stars and heroes just does not allow people to be people and the effect on people, culture and scholarship is not attractive.

Arrogance is never attractive.

[3] Basic Geometric Structures: We had an advantage over our scholars; we had boxes and boxes of perfectly clear, plastic tetrahedrons and octahedrons with which to create structures. Most scholars cannot tell you what is perfectly enclosed within a tetrahedron even when you divide the edges by two and connect the new vertices. They haven’t seen the octahedron in the middle. When they look at the octahedron they do not see “half-sized” octahedrons in each of the six corners and eight tetrahedrons, one in each face, with all fourteen objects sharing a common centerpoint. Nor do they see the four hexagonal plates within each octahedron and think about chemical structures. They have not seen how the five tetrahedrons create a most basic gap whereby one can actually make tetrahedrons do the jitterbug. It takes a high school geometry class and playful engagements.

How do these structures come to be? Our antenna were up when we began our studies of cubic-close packing of equal spheres. We thank Phil Davis; he had pushed our faces into the sphere, “…the most basic structure…” And given his expertise, the twinkle in his eye, and his abiding warmth and gracious spirit, we listened. And finally, here we found the work of Harriot, Kepler, Poincare, Gauss, Hales and so many others creating the bridge between spheres and our simple tetrahedron. Bottom line, we could only conclude that the most basic sphere is defined by the Planck base units!”

[4] The Very Nature of Pi: With all the fascination with pi, with the playfulness of Pi Day, with its status as history’s oldest, best-known, most-studied, and most-ubiquitous dimensionless constant, why haven’t we stopped long enough to acknowledge it for our culture, “Here is our deepest key to understanding of everything!” Here is the pathway to understanding continuity, symmetry, and harmony. Here is the transformation nexus between that which is finite and that which is infinite.

[5] Lemaître’s Primeval Atom or Sphere: A sphere is a sphere. How small can it get? How small is the Democritus atom? How small is Lemaître’s 1928 primeval atom? Did it get much bigger with his reintroduction with a very-hot beginning in 1931? Questions abound.

[6] Wheeler’s geon and quantum foam (1955): Perhaps John Archibald Wheeler, one of the great theoretical physicists of our time, had a deeper sense of the sphere when he introduced the geon and quantum foam. Reflecting on their work with him in 1952, Charles Misner, Kip Thorne, and Wojciech Zurek give Wheeler credit for naming Planck Time and Planck Length; they concur that Planck’s 1899 calculations define the most basic units of space and time. However, Wheeler and his biographers were all blinded by an imagined infinitely-hot start, and never asked the question, “What would our universe look like if we take the Planck base units as a description of the very first instant of space and time?” Instead their thinking dropped into an impossible singularity without much clarity. Over 350 dimensionless constants tell us that there is no singularity.

[7] Pati & Salam’s preon: Others made valiant attempts to fill in the blanks and voids when they found them. Jogesh Pati and Abdus Salam were among early attempts at a Grand Unified Theory (GUT). Like the others, it was all top-down and blinded by the big bang. The first 64 notations out of 202 that encapsulate the universe could not be seen.

[8] The Planck base units: In 2011 when we were constructing our very first Big Board-little universe, we asked ourselves, what is smaller than particle physics? What is on each line from Notation-0 to Notation-64? We asked, “Are these Planck units the next big thing?” It would take several years before fully engaging the concept that the Planck base units define an infinitesimal sphere. Then followed the concept that the expansion rate of the universe was one plancksphere per plancksecond, that time is derivative, and the continuity, symmetry, and harmony of the sphere-and-pi were extended to the foundations of the finite and the heart of the infinite.

[9] Harmony Manifesting Dynamics: First challenged to engage the Fourier Transform through a New Yorker article by Cornell University mathematics professor, Stephen Strogatz, it seemed that Jean-Baptiste Joseph Fourier opened the door to study any and all dynamical relations. Though scale independent, very little work had done to apply the Fourier Transform to the Planck scale. That begins to change here with our initial recognition of five transformations.

[10] Newton and Leibniz: The infamous debate was never completed; Leibniz died so Newton won by default. He shouldn’t have won. Yet, absolute space and time is so ingrained within our beings, most of us will have a bit of trouble breaking it down. His Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica of 1686 some say is the true beginning of the discipline of physics. Others say that it is possibly the greatest textbook of all of science. One would be judged a fool to take on such standing! Yet, when ones model coheres, we should never be intimidated by an arrogant, unpleasant person. It is entirely possible that he was still wrong about our most fundamental starting points, “What is space? And, what is time?

[11] The Infinitely-Hot Start of Stephen Hawking: As recently as 2016, Hawking was the host of the PBS-special television series titled, “Genius.” Everybody working with those scripts thought the big bang was the only true religion. With such a brief period of human history, perhaps as short as 400,000 years, we do not think it is wise to tout any particular belief systems unless it in some ways reflect the continuity, symmetry, and harmony within pi and the sphere. Here are universals that in some manner reflect the fundamentals of the finite, and the essential nature of the infinite.

[12] An Infinitesimal Sphere, the first notation: Back in 2017 Neil Turok and his colleagues famously proclaimed that the big bang theory was wrong. Most significantly, they added, There is a perpetual state of big bangs. Non-intuitive, the only model to date, where such an assertion makes sense is within 202 base-2 notations whereby every notation is still active and is responsible for the expansion of the universe.

[13] Remarkable Interiority of Infinitesimal Spheres: We have a huge task before us. The references within just the Wikipedia listings for the Fourier transform are voluminous. There is a lifetime of study. We cannot hope to begin to grasp it all. But, we will try! Our web searches began with “Planck scale” + “Fourier Transform” and returned over 50,000 results. We are starting to work through them all. A cursory analysis of a few pages is most encouraging.

[14] Everything, Everywhere, throughout All Time Encapsulated, Noted, and Footnoted: That summary statement just seemed to encapsulate the simple logic that had been guiding us. If Planck Time and the Planck Length represent the smallest possible units of each, is it logically possible for anything to exist outside of those domains. We revisit the question often and will continue on our summary document and our related claims.

[15] Omniscience: Religions jumped ahead of the sciences. To the best of my knowledge, there has not been a scientific-systems theory that would incorporate the Akasha. That the Buddhists, Confucians, Hindus, Jains, Taoists, and all other sects that lift up Wuji philosophies have somehow seen this from within their own journey will be explored further.

[16] Simplicity and the Beginning of Complexity Theory. The 64 notations from the Planck base units to the CERN scale of particle physics represents a new domain for science. I have called it hypostatic because it cannot be directly measured with physical devices. Three young scholars have suggested a means to make possible indirect measurements. I believe their work could well open new methodologies for science that go back to 1884 when Lord Kelvin speculated about the nature of dark bodies within our galaxy. The measurement of dark energy and dark matter is a beginning.

We live in a complex universe that starts most simply. Within that simplicity are the key insights about how we can co-exist and more meaningfully engage our days.


Reminders to return to the work of these scholars and to think more deeply about their constructs of reality. THEIR ARTICLES HAVE BEEN PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION THIS ARTICLE.

The last six homepages have been keys to this page:
The Mind, the Self, the Brain and the Human Mystery (December 26, 2020)
The First Instant of the Universe – Pi Circle, Sphere (November 27)
The Expansion of the Universe (November 16)
Change the Metaphor – Rewrite the History (October 16)
Countdown: Minutes, Seconds, Nanoseconds… (October 16)
This World Can Become A Nicer Place (September 23)

EMAILS (1 of 10)

As an article begins to take shape, friends and scholars are engaged to provide initial feedback.

The images at the top of this article are of world leaders, left to right, starting with China’s
Xi Jinping
and going to Germany’s Angela Merkel. Each of those leaders will be sent an email that goes something like this:

“As one of the key leaders of our world today, you are pictured at the top of this page.

“The entire world is in search of peace-and-prosperity, respect-and-dignity, and love-and-integrity. Unfortunately our realities are quite different. It is obvious that our understanding of this world and our universe is incomplete. We need to adjust our understanding of some of the fundamentals through which life takes shape and things develop. I believe our biggest problems relate to our incomplete understanding of one of the most common, oldest, and best-known things in our life. That is pi with her circles and spheres. The three teach us about continuity and order, symmetry and relations, and harmony and her most important dynamics whereby lines, tetrahedrons and octahedrons, become space, time, the finite and infinite.

“More work is here: http://81018.com and https://81018.com/precis/

TWEETS (5 of 23)

Eventually to drive traffic to the site and create a little buzz, key words are used to find discussions on the web with people who might be interested.

6:13 PM · Jan 16, 202, Angela Merkel: Our problems require a new vision of who we are and why we are. We must address issues that go right back to how we understand space and time and this world and universe: https://81018.com/precis/ is a start. Have your best scientists, scholars, and thinkers focus on these issues.

6:18 PM · Jan 16, 2021, Angela Merkel #2: True, but we all believe things that are not true. Old ideas need to be re-examined. What is space? What is time? What is finite? What is infinite? How did it all begin? Some of the giants were only right in their time, not ours. See https://81018.com/precis for more.

10:06 AM · Jan 21, 2021 @davidburkus @mitchjoel @LauraHuangLA @thomaswedell None of us should ever stop growing. Babies are naturally solipsistic; they only have MyView. Most adults have limited WorldViews. Leaders need an integrated UniverseView. Today, Worldviews are too small. We all need the most-inclusive perspective possible. A start: http://81018.com

4:14 PM · Jan 21, 2021 @BillClinton @HillaryClinton @davidnour Did you know that in 1899 Max Planck calculated the smallest possible units of length and time. If you apply base-2 (doublings), there are just 202 notations that define the universe from the beginning of time until now. We all need to be working on an integrated UniverseView: http://81018.com

5:38 PM · Jan 21, 2021 @antonioguterres As SG of UN, lead the world in a new vision of who we are and why. Our little worldviews need to become highly-integrated, mathematical views of the universe. Space-time becomes derivative and finite. Relations become really real. A start: http://81018.com

11:06 AM · Jan 23, 2021 @RamonCruzDiaz Just sent an email; now to follow-up. We will not break free of our narcissism and consumerism until we break free of narrow worldviews. We all need to work on an integrated universe view. Here’s a start: http://81018.com …all simple math but a framework!


The last word, often afterthoughts, about this article and what is happening in our little world.

We so kowtow to our leaders. There is a long, brutal, and largely-forgotten history behind it all. In so doing, we impart a little divinity to them. When we don’t, it may be demanded. The respect that comes with leadership sometimes is not earned, but required.

So, who within our world is the best leader? Who is the wisest? Who is the smartest? Who is the bravest? Who has the most integrity? Who has the most love? Who has the most generosity? We must begin to discern and compare such qualities so all our leaders compete to hold some part of those judgments.

Ten global leaders posted, enough to fit across the page in one row:

Xi Jinping: premier@mail.gov.cn Peng Liyuan (spouse), Xi Mingze (daughter) http://www.gov.cn/
Vladimir Putin: http://en.kremlin.ru/contacts
Kim Jong-un: https://www.korea-dpr.com/ https://www.korea-dpr.com/organization.html
Mr. Alejandro Cao de Benos korea@korea-dpr.com usa@korea-dpr.com http://www.rodong.rep.kp/en/
George Soros: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/
Pope Francis: https://twitter.com/Pontifex http://www.vatican.va/c
Joe Biden: joe@joebiden.com http://joebidden.com @POTUS
Queen Elizabeth: https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily https://www.royal.uk/
Donald Trump: https://donaldjtrump.com/ (still a leader for many people around the world)
Benjamin Netanyahu: https://t.me/bnetanyahu https://twitter.com/netanyahu
Angela Merkel
: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/chancellor

Who might undertake such a project?

Key Dates for this document, Precis

  • This document was started on January 13, 2021.
  • First posted for collaborations: January 14, 2021.
  • The URL for this document is https://81018.com/precis/
  • The Prior Homepage: https://81018.com/conscious
  • First Tagline: A little precis for this website and our universe
  • The last update of this page was on January 24, 2021.