**David Deutsch**

Oxford University

**ArXiv**: https://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Deutsch_D/0/1/0/all/0/1

**CV** (partial): http://www.daviddeutsch.org.uk/papersarticles/

**Twitter**: https://twitter.com/daviddeutschoxf

**Wikipedia**: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Deutsch

**YouTube**: 46,000 Google references!

First Tweet: 27 January 2018

##### Responding to an earlier tweet by Deutsch where he says, “For instance, Nazism. The Jungfolk oath was taken at the age of 10 in Nazi Germany: https://goo.gl/uWVndy ” which was a response to Richard Dawkins tweet: ““I want to give my life for Islam.” This boy is 15. He says his elder brother has already been “martyred” and his parents are happy that he’s to become a suicide bomber. Could anything other than religion inspire such madness? http://bit.ly/2DOU9cV ” (And now, as an afterthought I’ll add, “And values become the penultimate.”)

A ten year old needs a basis to say, “That’s not right.” First blame Newton and Leibniz. If Leibniz hadn’t died, Newton may not have won the debate — https://81018.com/what-if –and, we’d have 300 years of relational thinking where space and time are derivative.

First email: Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:25 PM

Dear David,

I have had a totally unremarkable career, yet I have rubbed shoulders with some of the greats only because I had the audacity to write to them and on occasion to go to visit with them. John Wheeler, for example, sent me his little pre-published copy of “Frontiers of Time.” I found your work because John Baez uses the same quote from Wheeler that you do (at the bottom of this page). Stick the entire sentence into Google, and your work — http://beginningofinfinity.com/opening-paragraphs — comes up quickly.

##### “Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that when we grasp it — in a decade, a century, or a millennium — we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid for so long? – John Archibald Wheeler”

BTW, thank you for providing the source: *Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences*, 480 (1986)

In 2011 I was substituting for my nephew, a geometry teacher in the local high school — “…just teach them about Plato’s solids.” I did. We all had so much fun, I was invited back (I suspect primarily because the school did not have to pay for a substitute. I was free). Early in September the nephew asked me again, “Could you take my Monday classes (December 19) so Ali and I can leave on a cruise on the Saturday just before it?” It would be the students last day of school prior to the Christmas holidays.

I began looking at our prior work where I had brought in plastic models so they could readily construct the five solids. Many were a little complex. Some of these models were great to teach tilings and tessellations. I asked, “If we go further within the tetrahedral-octahedral cluster, how far in can we go? How many steps back to the Planck Length?”

I was surprised to discover the answer.

Over these past three years, the whole thing has become a bit of an obsession. I need to get back to my gardens and plants. So, I am looking for somebody who is obviously well-informed, brilliant, but with some commonsense and wit.

Just from my cursory view of your websites and books, I could not ask for anyone better. John Baez is so self-assured, he has no time for this idiosyncratic stuff. He has already spent a lot of time dispelling crackpot ideas as nonsense. Yet, I suspect he couldn’t quite say, “This is Not Even Wrong!” Maybe you can.

For my money (what little is left of it), I believe that this is a great ordering system, just for its heuristic value. However, could it somehow be misleading? I can not imagine why. It seems to me to be a little gateway to that simplicity and beauty that John Wheeler was suggesting.

I would dearly enjoy your thoughts on this matter!

With kind regards,

Bruce

———————————

Bruce Camber

Search: “81018.com” + “David Deutsch”