Most recent email: 18 November 2020
Dear Prof. Dr. Robert Laughlin,
I have spent another two years reading more and more about the Planck base units. Who are the experts? Is Frank Wilczek Scaling Mt. Planck, 2001)? There’s more to come….
Second email: 11 October 2018
RE: From Emergent Quantum Field Theory to TOES, GUTS and the like
Dear Prof. Dr. Robert Laughlin,
In our extreme naïveté we outlined the universe in 202 base-2 notations,
simple doublings from the Planck base units to the age and size of the universe.
I sent a note about it to you back in 2013 (when we were young).
To have a theory of everything, wouldn’t it be good to have
included everything, everywhere throughout all time?
I believe that our chart outlines such a universe.
Might you take a look? Our simple chart of the universe:
https://81018.com/chart is a horizontally-scrolled chart
that I started for our high school students back in 2016.
The project started back in December 2011.
Isn’t science asking “too much fundamentality” from our particles?
Assuming our Planck base units are the starting points,
the CERN-scale does not begin until the 65th to 67th doublings.
That gives us at least 64 doublings, a huge array of possibilities
for mathematical physics to develop every sort of flavor, spin,
and emergent behavior required, measured, or observed.
Just a naive (totally idiosyncratic) thought.
Warmest regards (as I read your NAS, November 1999 paper),
First email: Friday, Mar 15, 2013 at 2:50 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Laughlin:
I had written to Don Kennedy (attached) an earlier note and he deferred any critical review to NAS to find an appropriate scholar. Given our simple logic, it will take a bold-but-kindly person to engage it.
Perhaps you can advise me and our best students from five high-school geometry classes what to do with out little formulation. I fully realize that with your background and engagement with life, you are very busy as well but a colleague at Stanford suggested that you might be intrigued enough to tell us how it is right and why we are wrong.
I was the substitute for my nephew ‘s high school geometry classes just up river from New Orleans. Similar to Kees Boeke base-10 scientific notation, we were working on base-2 exponential notation to examine the inside structure of the platonic solids. We started with the tetrahedron. By dividing each edge in half, using that point as a new vertex and connecting all the new vertices, we end up with a half-sized tetrahedron in each corner and an octahedron in the middle. By doing it again with the octahedron, we emerge with half-sized octahedrons in each corner and eight half-sized tetrahedrons in each face. One might assume it can be done ad nauseam, but one comes bumping into the Planck Length (PL) in about 100 notations. Going out, one hits the edges of the observable universe in about 100 steps.
Because we were getting so much conflicting information, we asked a NASA physicist to help us calculate that the total number of notations (doublings or steps or layers) based on recent results from SDSS-III BOSS measurements. Just 202.34 from the PL to the EOU! Now, we were quite surprised. Why haven’t we seen this before? How did we miss it? So, we did a literature search and found very little (at that time).
What are we doing wrong? If nothing, then, is the information worthy of deeper exploration? If not, why not?
In the intervening years since we started this trek, we have pushed on the edges of academia, but have had limited response. We have also written it up and attempted to get it out for a larger critical review. I’ll put some links to those pages below if you would like to read a little more.
Bruce Camber (a lowly television producer)
Small Business School, a television series on PBS-TV and VOA-TV
PS. Updated links for more:
1. Chart in 202 notations: https://81018.com/chart/
2. Redefine Space, Time And Infinity: https://81018.com/redefinition/
3. How’d it all begin? Which model works best? https://81018.com/s4a/
4. Basic assumptions: https://81018.com/opening/
5. Quiet Expansion: https://81018.com/2016/06/01/quiet/