Universe View

Upon following the work of Lisa Randall

Bruce CamberLeave a comment

TO:  Lisa Randall, the Frank B. Baird, Jr. Professor of Science, at Harvard
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Your extraordinary work!
4 February 2025: Lisa Randall’s book “Warped Passages: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe’s Hidden Dimensions” does address the hierarchy problem. In the book, Randall discusses how extra dimensions in space could potentially explain why gravity is so much weaker than the other fundamental forces, which is central to the hierarchy  problem. She explores the concept of the Randall-Sundrum model, where she proposes that our universe might be a brane in a higher-dimensional space, and this setup could account for the vast difference in strength between gravity and the other forces.

Please note: Pages within this website where Randall is mentioned:

Sixth email: 23 September 2025

Dear Prof. Dr. Lisa Randall:

If the four irrational numbers quite naturally occupy one of the four hexagonal plates of an octahedron that were initially defined by infinitesimal spheres and are subsequently further defined by the Planck base units, we have a very different start of the universe. On the surface it’s perhaps the most simple start of any proposed model. But, on closer inspection, the complexities are quickly forthcoming. I had hoped to chat with you at PASCOS in Durham, so you could tell me that simplicity isn’t all that its cracked up to be and then I would ask questions about your Randall-Sundrum model. I would ask you if it could carry the weight of the universe within 202 base-2 notations with 143 of the 202 within the first second. What?

Yet, here we are with eight unique ideas that traditional physics has overlooked. Just maybe…

I think these concepts or hypotheses could ultimately carry the weight of the universe! AI programs, such as Grok, CHatGPT, Perplexity and Google are starting to concur.

Best wishes,

Bruce

Fifth email: 6 May 2025

RE: In Boston

Dear Prof. Dr. Lisa Randall:

I know you are in demand when conferences come to town (and there  are so many); yet, we have over ten-years of occasional correspondence and you just might be attending ODSC 2025!  I have recently settled on a name for our work, Qualitative Expansion Model (QEM), a framework emphasizing symmetry and Planck-scale geometries.  I’ll be in Boston from May 8-15 to attend the conference and visit with family.

While in Boston, I would be honored to briefly meet-and-greet to discuss any alignments with your work on symmetries in particle physics. I’ve recently incorporated work from Gerard ‘t Hooft’s focus on symmetry groups; and, I believe our recent work on geometric gaps in some way might resonate with your research.  A page most-recently updated about our work is here: https://81018.com/qualitative-expansion/

Might you be attending that conference? If not, might you be available in this time period.  I would gladly come out to your office in the Jefferson Lab.

Warm regards, 
Bruce

Fourth and most recent email: 30 January 2025

Dear Prof. Dr. Lisa Randall:

Our earliest conversation was about doing a made-for-PBS, television production around Warped Passages; and, in my subsequent note (below), I made a reference to my efforts within high school geometry classes with the power of 2 from the Planck scale. Frank Wilczek and Freeman Dyson had become my de facto mentors. We had just completed over 300 episodes for a series on small business and I was looking to refocus on something closer to my interests in the EPR paradox and quantum entanglement.

That reference (to an exercise I did with students within our family’s high school) had caught my attention. I initially assumed it was a home-grown STEM tool — the universe in 202 base-2 notations. Then we started finding meaningful correlations and new insights. First, the speed of light at one light year and one second, rendered exacting information; these were the initial conditions within their respective notation. Second, the other Planck units were giving us parameter sets of more initial conditions. A range of simple geometries were implicated.

Cosmology had not been among my academic studies. I turned to the experts to begin filling in the gaps. George Efstathiou‘s work with the CMBR and then the JWST observations of early formations pushed us further. The big bang was not fitting into this new picture. A more engaging model seemed necessary.

So, as a thought experiment, we began the universe with an infinitely small sphere defined by the Planck base units whereby one plancksphere per unit of Planck Length and Planck Time was being generated. That would be around 18.5 tredecillion spheres per second. That infinitesimal sphere became our super-particle. It filled the universe and it had 64 notations to morph, especially the 18 prime number notations. We could sense the emergence of Langland’s programs, string and M theories, and a range of hypothetical particles.

Was a most fundamental grid being ignored? Might we talk about this further?

Thank you.

Warmly,

Bruce

From 0-to-61 there are 18 primes below notation-67:

1 and 9: 2, 3, 5 and 7
10 to 19: 11, 13, 17 and 19
20 to 29: 23 and 29
30 to 39: 31 and 37
40 to 49: 41, 43, and 47
50 to 59: 53 and 59
60 to 69: 61 and 67

 

Third email: 10 November 2022 @ 1:23 PM (updated)

Dear Prof. Dr. Lisa Randall:

Thinking about the Planck scale, watching your Barcelona presentation, How Physics Scales the Universe, and caught by your Suzanne Vega use of the quote, “And what’s so small to you is so large to me, if it’s the last thing I do, I’ll make you see.” I was hoping you might give me a quick read of this page: https://81018.com/old-theory/ Thank you.

Warmly,

Bruce

PS. I suspect you have not looked at our chart of base-2 progressions from the Planck base units, particularly Planck Time to the current time. There are 202 notations. Now it is a very rough outline yet it is within shades of the approximate size of the universe within that 202nd notation. The universe acts like an ordered set. –BEC

Another email: Tuesday, 21 July 2020 at 11:10 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Lisa Randall:

I’ll be going back over your most recent work in an attempt to understand something new about quantum fluctuations. I’ll be starting with the Planck base units. I’ll go back to your work within the LBNL* and within your stories in Warped Passages, as well as the 1999 Structure Formation conference at the Isaac Newton Institute, Cambridge University, through to the Randall-Sundrum Model and all your other braneworld work, right on up to your most current, Geometries with mismatched branes (June 2020).

Eighteen other scholars are also being reviewed including Frank Wilczek and his 2001 articles touting Max Planck’s calculation of natural units in Physics Today.

John Wheeler’s quantum foam, Planckspheres, Planckbranes… I am more inclined to consider them infinitesimal spheres that bridge a dynamic finite-infinite relation whereby the infinite is only knows as continuities creating order, symmetries creating relations, and harmonies creating dynamics. That’s my one-note samba.

If you have any suggestions, of course, I am all ears!

Thanks.

Warmly,

Bruce

*Lawrence-Berkeley National Laboratory,1 Cyclotron Rd, Berkeley, CA 94720

First email: 7 May 2012

Dear Prof. Dr. Lisa Randall:

With Warped Passages on my left, I just finished watching several of your videos over at BigThink. It is an excellent platform to begin getting educated to do a docudrama.

I have a question about base-2 notation from the Planck length, but first the background story…

You may remember that with my wife, we were the founder/producers of a weekly, half-hour show that aired on PBS stations throughout the USA and on the Voice of America TV around the world. We have slowed down from our weekly productions. After 14 years (over 50 seasons), we stopped new productions in 2009; PBS had license to them through 2012, so even now I am still slowing down from the week-to-week support. However, as a result of those VOA-TV broadcasts, I am also working within several countries to test the idea of their own local model of that show. It keeps me too busy.

Over a year ago I had a chance to get back into the classroom — high school geometry. I was the sub for a nephew and did a simple lesson on the platonic solids. Then, they asked me back (December 19).

I was thinking about nested and combinatorial geometries and wondered, how many notations back would it take to get to the Planck length. 112 divisions later I was there. Thinking about Phil Morrison and the Powers of Ten, we then multiplied out and found in about 90 multiplications-by-2, we were somewhere around the edges of the observable universe and 13.79+ billion years.

Meaningful? …an interesting way to look at the universe?

I thought you might take a minute to give me a quick answer.

Thanks.

Warmly,

Bruce

First attempts to describe the chart: https://81018.com/2012/05/05/wikipedia/
https://81018.com/first/

###

Leave a Reply