ArXiv: Target Space ≠ Space, August 2015
• The (A)temporal Emergence of Spacetime with C. Wuthrich, October 20170
• Skeptical Notes on a Physics of Passage August 2015
• Emergent spacetime and empirical (in)coherence with C. Wuthrich in the Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44(3): 276–285, 2013 Also, see reference within Finitism in Geometry
Books: Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale: Contemporary Theories, (PDF) 2012
Beyond Spacetime, The Foundations of Quantum Gravity, With , Uppsala Universitet, Sweden, , Université de Genève, 2020
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science: “Why the Parts of Absolute Space are Immobile,” v.59(3): pp 391–407
Stanford Encyclopedia: Absolute and Relational Theories of Space and Motion
• Huggett, N. & C. Wuthrich, 2013a, “Emergent spacetime and empirical (in)coherence”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 44(3): 276–285 (Reference within Finitism in Geometry)
• Zeno’s Paradoxes
Also see: Christian Wüthrich, Carl Hoefer, Craig Callender
Third email: 21 May 2020 at 3:18 PM
You know our work comes out of a high school; and when we started,
we all thought it was a great little STEM tool. Then we finally realized
how out of the mainstream we were. We stopped that program within
the high school thinking it would be too confusing for our graduates
to process it all once they hit their college classes. Now that I realize
how idiosyncratic it all is, I am glad we pulled the plug on it.
We need somebody to say, “You’re wrong and here’s why.” Our
little chart just keeps asking questions and suggests very simple
answers, so I tarry on with it, i.e. https://81018.com/duped/
I hope you are well and surviving all the absurdities of our times.
Second email: Saturday, December 7, 2019 @ 1:23 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Nick Huggett:
Now a year since my first correspondence with you, I’ve had more time to reflect on your work with your colleagues. The first question does seem to be “Is our physical universe finite or infinite?” Would you agree?
Of course, the next question would be, “Do you have a preference today and why?”
Also, as I get to know some of your collaborators, particularly Christian Wüthrich, Carl Hoefer, and Craig Callender, would you add some of your other co-authors such as Keizo Matsubara (as referenced above)?
First email: Thursday, 8 December 2018 @ 12:05 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Nick Huggett:
I share your interests in the philosophical foundations of quantum field theory. Then, I found your articles in the Stanford Encyclopedia and simply wanted to thank you for all of your work. When I opened Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale, I wish I had started studying with you years ago.
In 2011 we did a Zeno-like walk back inside a 1.5″ tetrahedron (and octahedron within it), each time, dividing the edges by 2 and connecting those new vertices. In 45 steps, we were in the range of particle physics. In 67 more steps within, we were facing the Planck Wall. It didn’t take us long to multiply our little tetrahedron by 2 to discover in 90 steps, we were at the age and size of the universe. Our chart with all the numbers is here: https://81018.com/chart/
I thought you might enjoy our very idiosyncratic approach and either discourage or encourage us. You have already given us some comfort within your writings.