ArXiv (200+): Active Field Theories (April 2019)
Lecture: Statistical Physics and The Arrow of Life
More Publications: Soft matter, Phase ordering in active and passive systems
Appearing within this website here:
Homepage – The New from the Old
Most recent email: January 20, 2020
Dear Professor Dr. Mike Cates:
Your were on the homepage of our website at the turn of the New Year and as a result I have reviewed my emails to you. I apologize for being so presumptuous even to consider writing to a scholar as you are. Time is precious. So I apologize again for this note!
Second email: November 15, 2019 @ 7:00 AM (Updated email)
Dear Professor Dr. Mike Cates:
My guess is that the influence of the 19 Lucasian scholars has been more pronounced than any other small group of people in our world’s history. Of our many theories, Newtonian space and time would be the most lasting and most deeply adopted. Although big bang cosmology goes back to Lemaître, Stephen Hawking empowered it within the public domain. Infinitely hot became an initial condition of the universe. Yet, it seems the 1999 “Structure formation” conference (sponsored by NATO at the Newton Institute) opened the first formally informal attack on big bang cosmology; and now twenty years later, there are many alternatives (multiverses and such).
None have caught the imagination of our leading scholars or the general public. Notwithstanding, the edited synopsis by Robert Crittenden and Neil Turok of that conference, I believe, will be recognized as a bookend of the big bang theory.
High school people, especially including their teachers, command little respect so I have not been surprised that a radical departure from the historic textbooks has gotten very little attention. It will take a scholar of Lucasian quality to hold the reins and call to question age-old first principles.
Perhaps you could take a look at a little summary of the current state of the Newtonian legacy: https://81018.com/bridge/ We started our work in December 2011; we began disbelieving in the infinitely hot start of big bang cosmology in 2012 and we began actively asking scholars like you for help to interpret our results properly.
Would you encourage or discourage this effort?
First email: Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 7:25 PM (revised)
Subject: Lucasian Professors
https://81018.com/review An introduction to the current analysis dialogue
https://81018.com/planck_universe/ Analysis of six sets out of 202
https://81018.com/chart The universe, all time, all space, and everything everywhere
Dear Professor Michael Cates:
It’s quite enough that gentle Neil Turok is beating up on the big bang;
Turok suggests perpetual big bangs. I don’t think so; perpetual starts,
yes, but we call it a quiet expansion that becomes a natural inflation
over 202 base-2 notations from the Planck scale to the Now. All notations
are active all the time. Nothing is past.
My analysis is still quite rough, but hopefully not for too much longer.
Simple, logical. Space and time are sweetly derivative of light.
Finite-infinite relations are restored as continuity, symmetry, and harmony.
Yes, it’s just a bit idiosyncratic. Might you have some guidance for us? Thank you.