TO: John Horgan, Director of the Center for Science Writings, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, New Jersey
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Your homepage, CV, Scientific American, X(tweet), Wikipedia, YouTube (2)
URL for this page: https://81018.com/2015/04/25/horgan/
Fifth email: 30 December 2023 at 2:28 PM
Hi John:
Where have four years gone? My prior correspondence was Monday, 26 August 2019
I came upon your horganism, the-big-bang-theory-is-true-deal-with-it, and thought, “What? Huh? John?” That slash, bruising, blackening, Hoboken-trip-to-the-Hudson cut into your spirit of openness. It’s OK. We’ve been too polite too long. As I said directly to the Hawking-Guth family in 2016, exponential notation from an infinitesimal sphere gives us numbers that should not be ignored. Base-2 is simple. It’s first-and-second grade mathematics. Yet, it also gives us 67 notations to get to quantum fluctuations that are measurable. Aren’t those 67 notations open space for Langlands, Witten, Rovelli, Connes, Ambjørn, Dimopoulos, and so many more? Isn’t a base-2 outline of the universe useful?
Of course, I’ll grant you real numbers and a real exponential notation is a very special type of tweaking.
I wrote about it for an end of year report: https://81018.com/eoy-23/ and now I am rewriting it again as a beginning of year report: https://81018.com/boy-24/ (depending on when and if you get to this email).
Let me wish you the very best for the new year!
Warmly,
Bruce
PS. I should also thank you for the introductions to the work of Romeel Davé and Dave Schramm. I look forward to getting more familiar with their work! -BEC
Fourth email: Monday, 26 August 2019 @ 9:53 AM
Dear John:
You may not be aware of a page of references to your work on our site. On following the work of John Horgan (located here: https://81018.com/2015/04/25/horgan/ ).
We’ve been at it now for over eight years and our progress is ever-so-slow — there is so much to learn. But, until somebody shoots down that chart — https://81018.com/chart/ — we’ll tarry on.
We send you warm thanks for all your work and abundant wishes for its continuation!
-Bruce
PS. You might enjoy this recent article: https://81018.com/transformation/
PPS. If you ever want anything changed, added, or deleted on our page of references to your work, we will accommodate!
Third email: Monday, Jul 3, 2017 at 7:44 PM
I will enjoy following your work from your website, Scientific American pages, tweets and your work within your Stevens Institute of Technology, Center for Scientific Writings. Plus, there are all those other references within your Wikipedia pages! Congratulations on all that you have accomplished to date. And, you have miles to go before you sleep.
Out on the edge, searching for that from which space and time are derivative, I wish you well. -Bruce
PS. You might find this of some interest: https://81018.com/lefschetz/ We continue with our efforts. When something “big” happens with our work, I’ll let you know!
Second email: Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 12:48 PM
Dear John:
Phil Morrison was a friend.
In and around 1975, I was at BU GRS across the river and we worked on the Pentagon Budget together! He had a study group in his home. Phyllis was also quite active.
More recent work by Gerard ‘t Hooft and Stefan Vandoren open the base-10 exponential notation for time where Boeke was doing space. I asked Stefan by email why they hadn’t done base-2 and he commented that it would expanded their work by thousands. Not quite, so we just did it this past December and in February did the chart for the other base Planck Units.
Freeman Dyson encouraged our work to use it within teaching. And, we are pursuing the STEM ramifications of the model, but if our very Small-Scale Universe is in some manner of speaking “validated” by either Penrose or Wilczek, space and time will have been disintermediated (more than it has by the web), and we can begin thinking about how both are derived from geometries, continuities, sequences, and groups.
Unless I hear your objection, I’ll put you on our group listing for updates when it involves the likes of a Dyson (he’s over 90 now), Penrose, or Wilczek (forever the whiz kid). However, I believe “the kids” who are working on the mathematics of amplituhedrons will break through first. We’ll see. At that point, the base-2 structure will be seen as the simplest, most elegant container within which to be pushed back into the singularity of those base Planck Units. It’ll be a powerful ride!
More later. Thanks.
-Bruce
First email: Friday, April 24, 2015 at 4:48 PM
Hi John,
I just love your attitude and approach to life. It’s so right on.
We would so appreciate if you would encourage or discourage us on our “little” trek from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe: It comes out of a high school geometry class in NOLA.
Intro History: https://81018.com/home
Reflections on Intro History: https://81018.com/2014/12/01/door/
The Chart of Numbers that Stretches: https://81018.com/chart/
Thanks.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
—————
Bruce E. Camber
PS. In 1979 I had a display project under the dome at MIT that opened a little path to this project: http://81018.com/mit/ The scholars involved: https://81018.com/pursuit/ and https://81018.com/scholars77/
#####