Second email: Wednesday, October 12, 2016
Dear Prof Dr. Andreas Albrecht:
You may remember that in December 2011 our high school geometry classes “fell into” an integrated view of the universe: http://bblu.org Today, we start with Planck’s base units and go to the Age of the Universe in just over 200 base-2 notations: https://81018.com/charts
We were quickly told by an MIT Wikipedia editor (Stephens) that it was “original” research. We were also told it was idiosyncratic (Baez). We believe that logically, it must be the most-simple AND the only mathematically-integrated model of the universe to date. For some of us, we’ve begun to think it could be a real alternative to the big bang cosmology (and the big bang’s nihilism).
Now, it seems from our cursory overview that most of the people at the Perimeter Institute conference, Time in Cosmology, accept the place of the big bang.
To help our students and to attempt to context that diverse dialogue, I have created a few links to the conference and to your work. There are currently three key pages. First, there is a brief overview of the conference on a prior homepage of the site (fourth section down): https://81018.com/2016/10/02/2october2016/
There is also this page on the conference: https://81018.com/2016/06/30/perimeter/
Our general overview page of your work is here: https://81018.com/2016/08/08/albrecht/
If there is anything you would like to have added, deleted or changed, please just say the word!
Now, thinking about time and the large-scale universe, perhaps another conference could be entertained, Time in the small-scale and human scale universe. In less than a second, the universe within this base-2 model has already expanded well into the large-scale universe. Of the 200 notations, the first second from Planck Time is within notations 144-145. The first day (86400 seconds) is between notations 160 and 161. A light year is between notation 168 and 169.
If we engage the numbers generated using base-2 from the Planck base units, it appears to expand rather quietly right out beyond the need for a big bang.
PS. Yes, I know how very naive and totally idiosyncratic our work is. Notwithstanding, the simplicity of the logic and math has caught our imaginations. The numbers seem to speak louder than words. Although temperature is a problem, I think in time we’ll be able to adjust that line of figures with some kind of “reasonable” rationale, perhaps a different algorithm. -BEC
First email: Friday, August 8, 2016
Hi Andreas –
Again, thanks for all your work and access to it:
I especially appreciated finding, among so many, a reference to your work here (Slow-roll inflation):
We are making slow progress on our base-2 model; my hope is to interject enough current work that we bump into a hard conceptual stopping point or there is enough “stuff” there to be critically examined. It is laughably naive, but we are just following our noses.
Best wishes indeed,