**Michael Andrew (Andy) Parker**, Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge University

J.J. Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0HE England

**Article**: *What is the smallest possible thing in the universe? BBC News*, September 2012**ArXiv** (17 articles)**CERN**: founder of the ATLAS experiment for the Large Hadron Collider**CV**: “…research interests involve experiments to reveal new physics such as extra space dimensions, quantum-sized black holes, and supersymmetry… the physics *beyond the standard model of particle physics*… (and) supersymmetric particles and strong gravity processes in extra space dimensions.”**Homepage****inSpire**: M.A. Parker (Cambridge U.) Also: Beyond the Standard Model**Wikipedia**

Most recent email: 14 February 2020

Dear Prof. Dr. Andy Parker:

How refreshing it is to find an experimentalist who works with number theory and basic ideas! Though I have communicated with many within the Cambridge University Department of Applied Maths and Theoretical Physics, John Barrow‘s work has most impressed me. Of course, Hawking was the superstar and beyond the approach of people like me, but because this simple mathematical model seemed so obvious, I tried! Yes, the Lucasian Professors are only available to Nobel laureates and people like you!

Because I have reached that time in life when short term memories do not stick as well as they should, I log everything within our little website. Your work is included and every time I come upon references to you and your work, I smile thinking about the wonderful history of achievements of those within the walls of Cavendish.

How we understand the start of the universe is a key; here, I summarize keys to doors that apparently have not been opened or they have only been explored in a cursory way. One such view is within the infinitesimal notations, perhaps Notation-1 to about Notation-50 (within our 202 notations defined from Planck Time to the Age of the Universe today), just prior to quantum indeterminacy and fluctuations, where things still fit perfectly. Silly concepts for most, yet perhaps not for those with dreams of supersymmetries…

Thank you again for all that you have done and all that you are doing today.

Warmly,

Bruce

Fourth email: Sep 3, 2019, 11:32 AM

Dear Prof. Dr. Andy Parker:

What you are doing is exquisitely important. My work with Harvard folks

goes back to 1979 with Weinberg and Glashow. More recently Wilczek

(MIT) provided the most direct influence. Though Randall‘s work is important,

what we are doing is much too simple (simplistic) for her work.

Simple is good. Simplistic is not so good. I am trying to be sure we stay

on the simple side of the equation.

Because our base-2 chart (that expands the Planck base units) is entirely

numbers, there will be many opportunities to do “gut checks” with actual

experimental work. For our time and efforts, picking through your work

I think will be the most rewarding.

I think both Witten and Langlands (Frenkel) will begin to see their way into

the first 64 doublings once more benchmarks are established. There is

too much going on within this simplicity to ignore it.

Thanks.

-Bruce

Third email: 26 August 2019

Dear Prof. Dr. Andy Parker,

For us, you are among the top scholars whose citations are counted

within inSpire. Notwithstanding, I thought you might be a bit interested

to know there is another reference page on the web to your work:

https://81018.com/2015/09/14/parker/ (also https://wp.me/s7R26k-parker).

We initially were introduced to your writing by Clara Moskowitz, then

found your original BBC article, and now the floodgates are opened.

We would say that the Planck base units represent the smallest

possible thing in the universe. Because that thingness would be

below the thresholds of measurement for a length or unit of time

the mass-charge might be followed. So we applied base-2 and

followed them: https://81018.com/chart/

We asked you back in 2015 and we are still asking today:

Is this chart just mathematical nonsense? If you have a moment…

I thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

**************

Second email: Monday, 14 September 2015 @ 3:58 PM

cc: Clara Moskowitz, Scientific American

Dear Prof. Dr. Andy Parker:

We have enjoyed reading Clara Moskowitz’s 2012 article, “What is the smallest thing in the universe?” where you are her expert on things that are very small.

You may enjoy our work within a high school in New Orleans where we went inside the simple tetrahedron by dividing each edges by 2 and connecting those new vertices. We could see four half-sized tetrahedrons in each corner and an octahedron in the middle. We then went inside the octahedron; we found six half-sized octahedrons in each corner and a tetrahedron within each face. Our geometry classes were exploring the question, “How far within could we go by continuously dividing by 2 each tetrahedral-octahedral layer?” Then we asked, “How far out can we go by continuously doubling what we had?” With just these two Platonic solids, we could tile and tessellate each layer and between layers or doublings throughout the entire model. We learned about the limits in both directions and we have begun learning about this progression called base-2 exponential notation.

There were 202 notations from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe. Subsequently we also charted that with Planck Time, then with the other Planck base units. It is an entirely idiosyncratic voyage into the universe. You just might find it a bit intriguing and perhaps you could advise us, “What should we do with it?”

We know it is a perfectly fine STEM tool. We’ve all learned from following these progressions. But more recently, we think it has a bit more to offer.

We would be so pleased to hear what you think. You’re the expert on such matters!

For five classes of geometry students, we thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

———————

Bruce Camber

New Orleans

https://81018.com/home

PS. The teacher for these classes is my nephew and he uses me to help stir up the kids’ thinking.

First email: 31 March 2015

**Key reference**: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-19434856**Who**: Andy Parker is Professor of High Energy Physics at Cambridge University and a founder of the ATLAS experiment for the Large Hadron Collider at CERN.

Dear Prof. Dr. Andy Parker:

Congratulations on the Atlas project at CERN and your 500+ articles. Amazing.

Our high school classes are on a rather strange adventure and we have been for three years now. We are pushing into Penrose’s continuum and Wilczek’s grid. We are even studying writings such as the Jiu Zhang SuanShu (Chapter 8 ). But, we are doing it in an unusual way; we start with the Planck Units.

There are some physicists who do not think Max Planck’s units are meaningful.

We do, but we have questions:

1. Are the Planck Units a singularity? …an ontological non-reducibility? I don’t think so.

2. Can the Planck Length, Time, Mass all be multiplied by 2 over and over again? I believe that’s nature!

3. Is there any way to know if the universe is finite?

I have been looking for your answers within your published works, however, have not yet found your answers. Thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

About Bruce

In 1970 Bruce Camber began his initial studies of the 1935 Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) thought experiment. He became active within the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science. In 1972 he was asked by Robert S. Cohen, then chairman of the Department of Physics and a co-founder of the Center for Philosophy and History of Science, to visit with Harold Oliver of the Boston University School of Theology. Oliver had been on sabbatical with Fred Hoyle at Cambridge University. From those discussions with Oliver and based on (1) his research of perfected states in space-time through work within a think tank in Cambridge, Massachusetts, (2) his work within the Boston University Department of Physics and their colloquiums, and (3)_his work with Arthur Loeb (Harvard) and the Philomorphs, he was invited to come to study focusing particularly on the Newton’s concept of absolute space and time. In 1977, with introductions by Victor Weisskopf (MIT) and Lew Kowarski (BU), he went to CERN on two occasions, primarily to discuss the EPR paradox with John Bell. In 1979, he coordinated a project at MIT with the World Council of Churches to explore shared first principles between the major academic disciplines represented by 77 peer-selected, leading-living scholars. In 1980 he spent a semester with Olivier Costa de Beauregard and Jean-Pierre Vigier at the Institut Henri Poincaré focusing on the EPR tests of Alain Aspect at the Orsay-based Institut d’Optique. In 1994, following the death of another mentor, David Bohm, Camber re-engaged simple interior geometries based on several earlier discussions with Bohm and his book, *Fragmentation & Wholeness*. In 1997 he made the molds to create the plastic tetrahedrons and octahedrons used in the images online. In 2002, he spent a day with John Conway at Princeton to discuss the simplicity of the interior parts of the tetrahedron and octahedron. In 2011, he challenged a high school geometry class to use base-2 exponential notation to follow the interior structure of basic geometries from the Planck Length and to the edges of the Observable Universe.