Zeeya Merali, Research scholar, author and journalist. London, UK
Articles (literally hundreds of articles, over 101 in Nature alone)
• The idea of creating a new universe in the lab is no joke, Aeon, June 2017
• “Is mathematical pattern the theory of everything?”, New Scientist, Reed Business (on G. Lisi, 2007)
• In Search of Time’s Origin (Nautilus, January 2014)
• Nature, Theoretical physics: The origins of space and time,
• Back From the Future, Discover Magazine, August 26, 2010
Books: A Big Bang in a Little Room: The Quest to Create a New Universe, Basic: 2017, 9780465065912 | ISBN: 978-0-4650-6591-2
Homepage(s): AAAS, Aeon, Discover, Nature, ResearchGate, Scientific American, Social Trends Institute
inSPIREHEP, Twitter, Wikipedia
Eighth email: 6 November 2022 at 3:45 PM
In the latest homepage, https://81018.com/old-theory/, there are two paragraph about FQXi and I, of course, I want to be sure it accurately reflects reality.
In the body of the article is says:
“In 2020 an article was prepared for the Foundational Questions Institute (FQXi) It was the most comprehensive review of our model and nascent theory at that time. Notwithstanding, it was not reviewed within that scholarly community. Our work is so idiosyncratic, it didn’t get beyond an initial, casual review.”
 FQXi. The Foundational Questions Institute was started by Max Tegmark and Anthony Aguirre with financial help from the Templeton Foundation. This concresence of interest and abilities are keys to make a breakthrough. Tegmark, with Turok and others have called for a fundamental rethinking of space, time and infinity. Yet, among the defenders of the big bang faith, the deep believers, do not easily question the fundamentals of those beliefs and FQXi helps us all out of our ruts of misunderstanding. https://81018.com/3u/
Seventh email: 27 June 2022 @ 8:20 AM
Good morning! Are you aware of Aristotle’s mistake that was touted as truth for about 1800 years? We all make mistakes, but that’s got to be the penultimate. That it is so little discussed and understood is disconcerting. Here is my idiosyncratic take on it: https://81018.com/geometries/. Would FQXi have any room for it anywhere? Thanks. -Bruce
Sixth email: 14 March 2022 @ 3 PM
I thought you might enjoy it:
Fifth email: 18 January 2022 @ 5:45 PM
…delighted to see you within some of the FQXi videos. You may know from my earlier submission, within FQXi “3U’s” that I am off in a la-la land of simple math and geometries that keep impacting my understanding of things and relations. Most people write that work off automatically, first because it came from out of a high school and then I think because there is no published intellectual paper trail.
I know it is not by any means, a complete system; there are many more very basic concept puzzles to explore (and then always more). Today’s most problematic is here: https://81018.com/primordial/#Green
I am now trying to go back to the earlier thinkers, people like Schwarzschild and Compton to a point where the simplicities within pi provide structure where structure is unexpected. So, to that end, I’ve started my “Letters to Legends” and Schwarzschild was my first.
In the meantime I am getting to know some of the finest intellects living today. Unfortunately, time is running out on me, but until the last breadth, I’ll continue this unusual quest.
I am delighted you recognized BEC as being a Bose-Einstein Condensate. Did you know as BEC is being formulated, all the vowels are squeezed out first and Camber becomes CMBR…. peculiar. And silly.
Fourth email: January 14, 2022
Hi Zeeya –
I am slowly tightening up that page about your work:
What if pi gives us real information about the finite-infinite relation?
I think it does. https://81018.com/almost/
What if the infinite, for the purposes of logic-mathematics-and-science,
is continuity, symmetry and harmony? Why not?
What if the first moment of space/time is defined by the Planck base units?
That seems to be the beginning of a more simple, more inclusive model.
Third email: March 29, 2019
You are quite a remarkable person;
and, Peter Woit was wired a bit too tightly that moment.
The finite-infinite relation has not been addressed very well:
https://81018.com/infinity We all seem to be afraid of God talk.
I commend you for your boldness.
Regarding the IaF: Any proposals from Google Mind Team?
Could people from these two groups work together on a joint venture?
Second email, October 14, 2016
Dear Dr. Zeeya Merali:
You are doing very important work. To have a working reference, I’ve started a webpage about it here: https://81018.com/2016/10/14/merali/
If you’d like me to change anything, just tell us what.
I suspect there are many people working as hard as possible, night and day, to the same end goals of redefining science and religion. I have been focused on it since 1969 (college graduation).
When I found your science and non-duality page, I thought, “More of Zeeya’s people!”
To construct the universe, what about starting at the Planck scale? If we initially focus just on time, length, mass and charge and use the simplest extension, base-2 notation, the results render a rather dramatic result: https://81018.com/chart/ Today’s homepage — https://81018.com — is a always the most recent page to be created. We will always have a focus on time: https://81018.com/2016/10/02/2october2016/ Thanks.
First email: Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Thank you, Zeeya, for being such an insightful person.
I enjoy your writing.
You’ll see a horizontally-scrolled chart of the 202 base-2 notations from the Planck base units to the Age of the Universe. Here continuity and symmetry are our cornerstones. It stands to reason that there is something between the Planck base units and quarks, fermions and photons.
I thought you might find this of some interest.