ArXiv: What is “fundamental”?
• The utterly prosaic connection between physics and mathematics
• Which number system is “best” for describing empirical reality?
Books: Lorentzian wormholes: from Einstein to Hawking
CV (through to February 2011)
First email: 25 March 2020
Dear Prof. Dr. Matt Visser:
In looking at who else quoted Wigner’s Unreasonable Effectiveness, I discovered your work in ArXiv, among all the other papers, particularly The utterly prosaic connection between physics and mathematics. BTW, that’s quite a nice ArXiv collection! You do not hold back!
Then, I found you again within the wormholes discussions and dropped a reference to you (so to be sure to dig deeper into it). One of our most fundamental questions is always about the very nature of space and time. Though Nima Arkani-Hamed says, “It’s doomed,” it certainly needs to be better defined.
I have also enjoyed your spirited engagement of the question, “What is fundamental?” and in light of it, I wonder if you might comment on that homepage where I make reference to you.
I know how naive and overly simple that model is. It seems, however, nobody thought applying base-2 to the Planck base units (emerging within 202 notations) could be meaningful. https://81018.com/uni-verse/ It is a quick read and I would so thoroughly enjoy hearing your comments. Thanks.
PS. A couple of years ago my wife and I did a driving tour of New Zealand. What a joyous special home you have. When we were in Wellington, we took the cable car up to your Wellington Botanical Gardens and walked back down through your campus. Just lovely. -BEC