Universe View

Asking Questions of Prof. Dr. Mauro Dorato of Rome

Bruce CamberLeave a comment

TO: Mauro Dorato, Università degli Studi Roma Tre, Dipartimento di Filosofia, Comunicazione e Spettacolo, Roma, Italy
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Within ArXiv (8), especially Bohr meets Rovelli (January 13, 2020); your homepage(s) especially CV, Google Scholar, inSpire-HEP, Phil Papers: Bohr’s Relational Holism, and Spacetime Society, Twitter, Wikipedia, and YouTube.

URL for this page about your work: https://81018.com/2020/02/11/dorato/

Fourth email: 21 October 2025

Dear Prof. Dr. Mario Dorato:

FYI: AI validations, Toy Models, H₀ Derivation, and an emerging Lagrangian

Our page about your work had a visitor today, so I reviewed it. So much happens in a year!

Recently several AI platforms have been enthusiastic about our base-2 model. For the past 15 years I’ve asked  expert observers like you to help assess its validity and potential implications. Recently, I reduced it to a toy model and more recently, it all rendered a simple quantitative model that derives the Hubble constant from first principles at the Planck scale.

The core of the model is surprisingly straightforward: it posits that the Hubble constant emerges not from dark energy, but from a cosmological process defined by base-2 scaling from the Planck units. A key result is a direct mathematical derivation of H₀, “Toy Model Derivation of the Hubble Constant” It is here —  81018.com/hubble-derivation/— still a highly speculative proposal, the numerical correspondence is striking.

Is this a numerical coincidence, or does it point to a deeper rather overlooked principle? We hope to discover as we continue to build on our dynamic model of a finite-infinite grid and its Lagrangian.

Thank you for your time and for your contributions to our understanding of the cosmos.

Sincerely,

Bruce

P.S. The URL for our study of your work: https://81018.com/buchner

Third email: 13 March 2024 - Challenges
  1. JWST galaxies within 300 million years: Big bang theory
  2. Absolute space and time (1687 – Newton) versus Now.
  3. Aristotle: Missed most basic gaps in geometry. 
  4. Ignoring our most basic and simple math and geometry.

Dear Prof. Dr. Mario Dorato:

Congratulations on all your work. I am getting to know your work through an ArXiv read. It is enough to let me know that you might appreciate a different path around pi (π): https://81018.com/2024-piday

I hope you’ll take a look! Within the Critique on that page, there are links to four related pages.

We’ve got to get this right if we are ever to get along with each other and build appropriately. Our page about your work is here: https://81018.com/2020/02/11/dorato/

Thanks.

Warmly,

Bruce

PS. I been following many of your colleagues for years!  -BEC

​

Second email: Sunday, 31 December 2023 at 7:30 AM

Dear Prof. Dr. Mauro Dorato:

Happy New Year to you and your family and to your family’s families!

A few years ago, I sent you a little note of thanks. Whenever I read something that captures my heart, I write to the author. Then, to serve my memory, I create a page of references that I can possibly build upon to generate my next note. Today, I noticed that you had a visitor to our page about you: https://81018.com/2020/02/11/dorato/  It is wonderful madness because I am reminded of your work myself and go to visit that page and to think more about your work. Invariably, I’ll make some updates. Probably, not enough to warm your heart, but satisfying to me.I noticed that your Wikipedia page goes to a Mauro Golden. If that is a mistake, would you like me to fix it?

I am a fan of the James Webb Space Telescope. I believe it is going to force our hand with big bang cosmology updates (an historic relic as defined by Hawking) and push our sense of time well beyond Newton and Einstein (more like Rovelli’s).

It is now the New Year in Kiribati and New Zealand and here we go into 2024!

Prayers for you all, 
Bruce

First email: Tuesday, Feb 11, 2020 at 2:29 PM  (updated)

References:
• https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1026442015519
• https://philpapers.org/rec/DORBRH
• https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=uQbY6hsAAAAJ&hl=sl
• https://arxiv.org/abs/1309.0132 (31 Aug 2013)

Dear Prof. Dr. Mauro Dorato:

Yes, now, twenty years later, is it possible that there could be a different starting point for space and time?

I have been visiting with your article, “Substantivalism,  Relationism, and Structural Spacetime Realism (Foundations of Physics volume 30, pages1605–1628, June26, 2000).

My question: Can we start with the Planck base units, assume Planck Time is the first instant, apply base-2 notation, and parse the universe in 202 notations?  Obviously, we have done just that, but is it meaningful?

I studied at Boston University’s Graduate School from 1972 to 1980. Among my professors and friends were Bob Cohen, Abner Shimony, Milic Čapek, and John Stachel. They all would think a base-2 model is idiosyncratic but, given Boston University’s history for toleration, they might have encouraged the exploration. Would you?

Thank you and thank for all your most prodigious work.

Most sincerely,
Bruce

Leave a Reply