###### November 26, 2015 *In process. Your feedback is key. Last update: January 19, 2016*

**Yes, today is Thursday, November 26, 2015**.* Paris is healing*. Al-Raqqah is burning. And, without question, we all need a new model of who we are and why we are. There is simply too much darkness within this world and within our views of the universe.

Many people are aware that we have been on a speculative journey ^{1} that began in 2011 in a high school. Our journey is based on an idiosyncratic way of looking at our universe.^{2} Everything, everywhere, throughout all time is contained within just over 201 base-2 exponential notations from the Planck Base Units out to their largest possible measurements, always “this given moment” or *the Now*. Although our charts are simple, logical, and comprehensive, and all the numbers show us an exquisitely interconnected universe, they challenge some of our commonsense worldviews.

It is not easy to change one’s conceptual frame of reference. Oftentimes I feel a little slow because it becomes so difficult to put one-and-one and two-and-two together. But, we are motivated to break through the bottleneck of questions that have remained unanswered over our lifetime and throughout the centuries. We are pushed to ask, “What are we missing?” Taunting myself, I say, “Go over this one more time; you really are missing something here.”

**Dark Matter and Dark Energy are in that camp for me**. Yet, recently a faint light has come on. A new book by physicist, Lisa Randall, had become a subject of a discussion over lunch. The subjects of cosmology have always been way out there for me. Since childhood, especially on the occasion of a dark, clear Maine night, I have had a visceral reaction to it all. Spooked, jammed and suffocated by the vastness of the seemingly infinite universe, truly impossible to take it in, I learned to avoid cosmology and astronomy.

**Dark Matter **^{3}^{, 4} (links that go to Wikipedia open new tabs or windows). I had begun thinking that Dark Matter was a misnomer. Within the Big Board – little universe model, it is not dark *per se*, especially if part of the first 60 notations where there is an absence of light. Within our isotropic and homogeneous universe, space-time-charge-mass-and-temperature have a tightly-woven fabric, tiled and tessellated defined by base-2 exponential notation and the Planck Base Units.

Though associated with analyses of structures on the order of galactic scale, Dark Matter may best be seen within the context of all 201+ base-2 notations, yet especially the first 60 or so notations.

** Everything, everywhere, throughout all time. **That is the simple mathematical model we call the Big Board-little universe. We can see that space and time are contained. We can see a very simple beginning

**and we see-experience-feel the current time. We have our seeing-experiencing-feeling moments within the current time which is within the 201st notation. We have the physical definition of parts, for now I call these our physical archetypes between the 67th and 116th notations within the Human-Scale Universe. Our most essential being, the archetypes of our archetypes, are within the small-scale universe.**

*Everything-everywhere-throughout-time*has some kind of presence with the small-scale, human-scale, and large-scale universe.

There will be many challenges ahead to texture, define and defend such statements especially given that Dark Matter now constitutes only as much as 26% of the universe.^{5 } Out of our *naïveté*, it just may be that our simple model, this *Big Board – little universe*, gives Dark Matter a space and time, mass and charge, and a reason for being, and for being where it is.

I believe our little chart is like a gold and diamond mine because the key figures of the universe are all there just waiting to be examined. These figures have been given a cursory review. It is now time for the professionals to go in and take a hard look. I believe we can find configurations within those first 60 notations that can give rise to the observations and research throughout the entire history of cosmology and astronomy.

**Most speculative**: The small-scale universe is the human-scale universe is the large-scale-universe. It is discrete, quantized and derivative of continuities and symmetries and even an overarching harmony of the universe. Within this speculative journey we are defined by every notation. Our particularity and humanity come out within the 101 to 116th of the Planck Length but we are fully at the 201+ notation within “the moment” or “the now.”

A special challenge will be to come up with a better name than *Dark Matter.* Although the inherent continuity equation for those 201+ notations has classic characteristics generally used to describe God, here we will rely strictly on the simple logic and mathematics, the Planck Base Units, and basic geometries to create the parameters for our naming convention.

**Dark Energy**. Though this conceptual frame of reference is related to the expansion of the universe, and dark energy weighs in at 68.3% of the total energy in today’s observable universe, we would postulate that it, too, is related through the Planck Base Units and the systemic expansions within the first 60 steps of the *Big Board – little universe* model. Planck Time become one second between notations 143 and 144. So much happens in those 80 or so steps or notations or doublings from those first 60!

**Projections.** IIn December 2011 we began the discussions about our chart of the *Big Board – little universe*. In January 2013 we were encouraged to continue our study of the Planck Base Units by Prof. Dr. Frank Wilczek6^{,7} of MIT (a world-renown physicist and champion of Planck’s work). In December 2014 Planck Time was added to the chart. Then, in February 2015 the other Planck base units were included.

Obviously, for me, concepts need time to incubate.

First, as uneven as we are, I hope we are getting closer to justifying to the academic communities to come in to take a look at the inherent structures of the first 60 notations. To begin examining how those first 60 notations came to be and why they have been ignored, we have begun to focus on all the research and all the data from cubic-close packing (ccp), face-centered cubic (fcc), hexagonal close-packed (hcp), root system (A3) and Lie theory. It seems that all these applications and functions apply to the first 60 notations. And, inside those first 60 steps come all the dimensionless constants and soon thereafter, all the physical constants, and soon thereafter, the fermions and every expression of physicality.

That’s a rough outline within which our research of the first 60 notations will proceed. Now, where’s Lisa Randall ^{8} this morning and what has she been saying about dinosaurs?

Thank you.

***

**Endnotes**:

^{1} Speculative journey, dubbed the Big Board – little universe, began in December 2011 in our high school geometry classes.

^{2} Idiosyncratic way of looking at our universe is actually based on simplicity itself. In December 2014, Planck Time was added alongside the Planck Length. That was filled with pleasant surprises. Then in February 2015, the Planck Mass, Planck Charge, and Planck Temperature were added.

^{3,4,5} Dark Matter is the subject of many scholarly articles. The Wikipedia entries, however, are straightforward, easy reading:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_%28spacecraft%29#2015_data_release

^{6,7} Prof. Dr. Frank Wilczek**. **Throughout December 2011 and then throughout the following year, I asked literally hundreds of people, “Can you responsibly multiply the Planck Length by 2?” In December 2012, we got a response, an answer from Prof. Dr. Frank Wilczek, “One can certainly divide (or multiply) by two repeatedly, and generate different numbers or scales, just as one can with powers of ten.”

• https://bblu.org/2012/09/03/analysis/#Wilczek

• https://bblu.org/2015/07/24/simple/#CMO

^{8} Many years ago, back when we were doing our weekly television productions, I called and talked with Lisa Randall about doing a PBS-special about her book, *Warped Passages*. She had been inundated with such proposals. Subsequently, in 2012, I sent a note to ask about the cogency of our base-2 model. We had been told by an astute-but-young theoretical physicist (who asked to remain anonymous) that our work was idiosyncratic, but he wasn’t quite ready to say that it was *not even wrong*. We’ve asked some of the finest scientists from around the world and the brave among them in some way said, “Carry on (…but please don’t quote me).”

Lisa’s new book, *Dark Matter and the Dinosaurs: The Astounding Interconnectedness of the Universe*, reaches the same general conclusion as we do about the connectedness of the universe, yet I am rather confident that she would distance herself from our work and the reasons for our conclusion!