ArXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.10773 also many others, including
Predictions of the Quantum Landscape Multiverse, 21 Dec 2016
Practicum: AN ORIGIN STORY (January 23, 2019)
YouTube: How did the Universe Begin? Big Bang Creation Myths (Dec. 2018)
References within this website:
1. Homepage in February 2019: https://81018.com/key-question/
2. Reference within emails to Stephon Alexander
3. Planck scale to Quantum Fluctuations: https://81018.com/conference/
Most recent email: 29 January 2019 at 9:30 AM
Dear Prof. Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton:
My prior email back in October 2017 (below) was as a result of reading your ArXiv article referenced above with Stephon Alexander of Brown. Since that time, I have had several occasions to read more from your unique perspective.
One of the reasons I was initially attracted to Alexander’s work was the simplicity of his logic. It stood out because in the face of big cosmology, he said that it all either started hot, as with the Planck Temperature, or it started cold as in zero temperature. That was uncharacteristic within the halls of physics. Most had already defaulted to the Lucasians, Newton and Hawking.
We are waiting for some scholar with the depth and range that you have to explain why our simple logic of a very cold start and a natural inflation can not work. The numbers generated from simple doublings tell a story that seems to track well with big bang cosmology, yet gives us a very special kind of data that goes well behind what some are calling the epoch of reionization.
Since we can’t get behind that period, why not look at the simple data generated by logic, a cold start, and simple doublings? If it can be pulled into harmony with CMBR measurements, then I think it should be looked at even more closely.
It is not totally crazy if there is some possibility of seeing all these puzzle pieces rather differently.
First email: Oct 30, 2017, 8:21 PM
Thank you, Prof. Dr. Stephon Alexander and Prof. Dr. Laura Houghton-Mersini:
I’ve gone through your September 1, 2017 article and have highlighted several spots, particularly,
“We are exploring the possibility of an underlying microphysical mechanism that limit contributions to vacuum energy from phase transitions in the early universe, and furthermore which relates the energy of the vacuum to the coupling constants of nature and their hierarchy, in other words to the the Standard Model, in a fundamental way…”
In the microphysical scale, if you begin at the Planck units and use base-2, you’ll have those 64-to-67 doublings to the CERN scale which define the very-very early universe. Between the 143rd and 144th doubling the universe is just a second old and the length is the distance light travels in a second. https://81018.com/chart/ At the 197th we are within our first 500 million years and at the 202 we are now emergent within the Age of the Universe today.
That simple math and simple logic, of course, is too simple for most. You may be surprised, once you are inside those domains, how complex and open it all is.
Thanks again for your article.