Alan Lightman, Comparative Media Studies (CMS), MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139
(Princeton, Caltech)
Articles & Books: The Accidental Universe, 2014
Homepage(s): Wikipedia, YouTube
Most recent (fourth) email: 24 September 2024 (Updated)
RE: It’s been seven years since my last message. Today, that memory was triggered by a visit to our page about your work: https://81018.com/2016/07/05/lightman/. I’ll try now to edit it by adding your recent books, papers and videos.
Dear Prof. Dr. Alan Lightman:
I didn’t tell you about my encounters back in 1976 with Viki Weisskopf or in 2013 with Frank Wilczek or the times with Gian Carlo-Rota, Marvin Minsky, Philip and Phylis Morrison… I’m just a bit older than you, but you have resonated with the stars in ways that I can only dream of.
My work on base-2 notation of the Planck base units has progressed a bit from 2017: https://81018.com/interdependencies/ The homepage is always the most current: https://81018.com
Might we try enlarging the domain of physical sciences? Might we fill in the data from the Planck’s units to neutrinos, quarks and particle physics? Therein is the material, rational and scientific explanations for all things off the grid — dark energy, and all sorts of dark matters, including strings, Langlands, and so on.
You look great. Your recent books are sensational.
Let’s change the metaphor by acknowledging the first 64 notations that truly define the Planck scale.
Thanks.
Warmly,
Bruce
Third email: Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 3:06 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Alan Lightman:
We have made a little progress with our base-2 chart from the Planck units to the Age of the Universe, all encapsulated within 202 notations.
You may recall that our project began in 2011 in a high school geometry class where we were chasing the tetrahedral-octahedral clusters from our classroom model down to the CERN scale (dividing by 2) in about 45 jumps, and then further down to the Planck scale in 67 additional jumps. The next day, when we multiplied by 2, in just 90 jumps we were out to the Observable Universe and the Age of the Universe. It became our sweet little STEM tool until we added a time line and started questioning the first 67 notations… Still an infinitesimally small length and time, it begged the question, “What’s there?
Math is math. Continuity is continuity. And, symmetry is symmetry. Or, are there exceptions? As idiosyncratic as it is, have we stumbled on to something? That little model works wonders for space and time!
More updates:
Frequently changing homepage: http://81018.com/
A chart of all the numbers: http://81018.com/chart/
A simple theory: https://81018.com/spacetime/
Natural Inflation: https://81018.com/thrust/
Using the baseball metaphor, I know in this game, we are well outside the left field lines. Idiosyncratic would be a kind description of our project! Is it just specious thinking or could it possibly be dressed up and brought out onto the playing field?
Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
****************
Bruce E. Camber
http://81018.com
Austin, Texas
PS. Looking at the possibilities for math to work overtime, consider the scaling vertices at the 67th notation: 3.213×1060 is enough to begin fine-tuning. By our current notation, the Now — 202 — it has jumped on up to 1.699×10184 which gives us enough potential complexity to fine tune a multiverse! -BEC
Second email: Sat, July 16, 2016 at 9:44 am
RE: Is the insanity of our world linked to the lack of hope within our cosmologies?
Dear Prof. Dr. Alan Lightman:
The world’s a mess and the nihilism of the big bang doesn’t help matters. And just possibly, it is not the best model for the general public.
You all are so brilliant; and as one who believes in the big bang (it was the best option in the ’70s), do you think our high school work has any potential to become a new option?
In a Linked In posting yesterday, I said this: There are 202 base-2 exponential notations to encapsulate the universe, everything, everywhere, for all time. Once we all begin to see the utterly exquisite order of our universe, perhaps we can see the potential to discover what is truly exquisite about our world and each other. The bit.ly link is: http://bit.ly/29P61x0
Though entirely idiosyncratic and very naive about so many things, is there any hope that something might be useful in that base-2 model: https://81018.com/chart/
Thanks.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
*****************
Bruce E. Camber
First email: July 5, 2016 at 4:50 PM
RE: Amazing vitae. Simply wonderful. Congratulations.
Dear Prof. Dr. Alan Lightman:
We have a dream! We’re just highly-motivated high school folks so feel free to be hard on us. We have no depth of field.
In December 2011, our high school math club got started in a geometry class when we took the tetrahedron – octahedron structure and divided both by 2 until down in among the Planck base units. For consistency we then turned around and multiplied the base units by 2 until out to the Observable Universe. In February 2015 we added Planck Time and in February 2016, we added the other base units. More recently, we made it into a horizontally-scrolled chart and just this week we have had such audacity, we’ve begun to inform Stephen Hawking (via email).
Ours is a sweet little view of an ordered universe in just over 201 notations. But, so what? To figure that out, we really need to turn to people like you, leading intellects of our time. Do you have any advice for us?
Many thanks.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
*****************
Bruce E. Camber
http://81018.com