Articles: What Does Our Understanding of Time Suggest About the Nature of Reality? (March 2014)
-_– – –· Next Step Infinity (February 2011)
)— – –· Not a Bad Idea, Aguirre, A., Scientific American, p. 36 (August 2002)
ArXiv: The Cold Big-Bang Cosmology
YouTube (and many others)
First email: Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 3:16 PM (corrected: Feb 18, 2018)
Dear Prof. Dr. Anthony Aquirre:
Thank you for all your work; I’m tackling the above cited articles and your work within ArXiv.
Our high school geometry class went off on a wild tangent a few years ago. We decided Newton was wrong* and that Leibniz was going in the right direction, and Planck’s base units should not be ignored.**
We applied base-2 exponentiation, simple doublings of the Planck units; and in 202 notations we had this all-natural, simple inflation from a very cold start. The numbers stretched our imagination. Do you think there is enough cogency to continue this admittedly entirely idiosyncratic study?
Your comments would be highly regarded. Are we just too naive for words?
http://81018.com https://81018.com/home/ https://81018.com/chart/
*Tegmark wants to throw infinity out and Nima Arkani-Hamed wants to retire space and time.
**Big bang theory ignores all but temperature and its always a derivative.