TO: Harvey R. Brown, Philosophy Centre, 10 Merton St., Oxford, U.K.
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Your ArXiv (9) articles, especially Do symmetries “explain” conservation laws? (2020); and your book — Physical Relativity. Space-time structure from a dynamical perspective, Oxford University Press, 2005. Even your CV 2 and Philosophy homepage helps and your Wikipedia page on Selected Writings. Perspective, OUP (2005), and your YouTube: Notre Dame Institute for Advanced Study (NDIA and many others)
This page is located here: https://81018.com/2017/09/09/brown/
Third email: 17 June 2023 at 7:35 AM
Dear Prof. Dr. Harvey Brown,
From Sao Paulo to Oxford, you have done an extraordinary job challenging our minds and meaning. I have continued working on the idiosyncratic assuming Planck natural units describe a real entity (an infinitesimal sphere). With the growing crescendo of questions around big bang cosmology, our base-2 chart may well be off in many ways, yet its general thrust may be a way.
I am calling for a simple petition for our learned societies to raise the question, “What are possible alternatives? Have you checked out what came out of a high school in New Orleans?” https://81018.com/petition/ The message would be very simple: https://81018.com/message/
Would you have any suggestions to improve either document? Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
Second email: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 8:52 AM
Dear Prof. Dr. Harvey R. Brown:
I was a product of the BOSTON COLLOQUIUM FOR PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, the Cohen-Wartofsky group. Of course, the more creative among that group — Stachel, Shimony, Glashow — had little patience with the Planck units. It took Frank Wilczek (MIT) writing in Physics Today in 2001 to move those units beyond a Dirac-like numerology.
Today, using base-2 from the Planck units, the universe is encapsulated within 202 notations. The first 64 or so notations bring us to the edges of the CERN-scale. Notations 64-to-67 are a transition from a truly small-scale (still infinitesimally small length and time) physical universe to the human scale. It has only begun to be documented and explored.
- Which is better a Worldview or an integrated universe view?
- … big bang or Turok’s perpetual bangs (I would say infinitesimal bangs)
- Is space-and-time absolute or relational and derivative of…?
- Are continuity, symmetry, and harmony faces of the infinite?
- Can we keep that “i” of infinite small?
So, maybe the beginnings of a theory: https://81018.com/spacetime/
Natural Inflation: https://81018.com/thrust/
Thanks.
-Bruce
PS. Do you have any objections with this first pass at posting my email to you? It will be updated soon and will contain references to various web-based data.
First email: 9 September 2017
Dear Prof. Dr. Harvey R. Brown:
We are trying to find somebody within the history of science and philosophical thinking who has entertained the concept of encapsulating the universe within the 202 base-2 notations starting at the Planck units and going up to the Observable Universe and the Age of the Universe.
Our little project began in 2011 in a high school geometry class where we were chasing the tetrahedral-octahedral clusters from our classroom model back to the CERN scale (dividing by 2) in about 47 jumps, and then back to the Planck scale in 67 additional jumps. The next day when we multiplied by 2, in just 90 jumps we were out to the Observable Universe and the Age of the Universe. It became our sweet little STEM tool until we started questioning the first 67 notations.
Math is math. Continuity is continuity. Symmetry is symmetry. Of course, only math can fill those notations. Who might make sense of that math? Sir Martin? Barrows? Maybe Langlands? Maybe Wilczek? How about you?
I’ll continue dabbling with it. As idiosyncratic as it is, have we stumbled on to something? That little model works wonders for space and time!
My frequently changing homepage: http://81018.com
A chart of all the numbers: http://81018.com/chart
My simple theory: https://81018.com/spacetime/
Natural Inflation: https://81018.com/thrust/
I know in this game, we are well outside the left field lines. Is it just specious thinking or could it possibly be dressed up and brought out onto the playing field?
Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
****************
Bruce Camber
http://81018.com
Austin, Texas
###