Ard A. Louis
Oxford Centre for Soft and Biological Matter
Condensed Matter Theory Group
Rudolph Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics
Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford
ArXiv: Extracting short-ranged interactions from structure factors
CV
Homepage
Wikipedia
YouTube: George Ellis & Ard Louis, Top-Down Causation (many other videos)
First email: January 5, 2017
Dear Prof. Dr. Ard A. Louis:
My brother-in-law introduced me to you through your interview with Eric Metaxas (who talks a lot to get to a question); and while listening to your interview, I went to your home page and to several of your ArXiv articles. You’ve done a lot of very good work in a very short time! Congratulations.
I have only one key question for you; and like Eric, I will probably take too much time to get to it.
In helping out on occasion at the family’s private Christian school in New Orleans (high school geometry class, December 2011), we were tiling and tessellating the universe within our studies of nested and combinatorial tetrahedrons and octahedrons.
Out of that work came a surprisingly simple model of the universe. We used base-2 exponentiation starting with the Planck base units and went out to the Age of the Universe, perhaps called, the Now. Of course, it is very similar to the base-10 work of Kees Boeke in 1957 in Holland.
That chart of our numbers was made horizontal in April 2016: https://81018.com/chart
The first 67 notations, we’ve dubbed the Planck scale and the small-scale universe. The next scale, notations 67 to 134, we considered the human scale. It begins at the CERN-scale with the Higgs, fermions, etc. and goes up to chemical scale (80-90) and into the biological scale (90-100) and then into things, people, and city-states. Then, from notations 134 to 201, we entered the large-scale universe. It all seemed like an excellent STEM tool, a secondary school program to encourage involvement within Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM).
But something unusual happened when we applied Planck Time to the chart in December 2014. We could easily follow the first second of the universe, up and between notation 143 and 144. And, then we began thinking about the big bang, natural inflation, and all kinds of topics well over our heads.
It seemed like our chart was simulating the big bang without a bang! Now, my writing is certainly not ArXiv quality.
Key Question: Do you think it could be worth the time to attempt to get a few of our papers into an ArXiv format or are they just too general and idiosyncratic?
Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
*************
Bruce Camber
http://81018.com
PS. We have certainly enjoyed the work of Cambridge/Oxford colleague, Jonathan P. K. Doye, over the years.
