TO: Matt Visser, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Your ArXiv (12) articles especially What is “fundamental”? (PDF) (2018), The utterly prosaic connection between physics and mathematics (2017), and Which number system is “best” for describing empirical reality? (2012, 2022);
book, Lorentzian wormholes: from Einstein to Hawking (1997); as well as your
homepage, CV, Google Scholar, inSpire-HEP, and Wikipedia.
On this website: https://81018.com/2020/03/25/visser/ (this page)
Third email: 4 September 2024
Dear Prof. Dr. Matt Visser:
You grasp idiosyncratic points of view. You’ve had a few along the way. Most self-correct with time. Unfortunately since writing our first note in 2014 and the second in 2020, we’ve dug ourselves in deeper. Now I know we are not worth your time to help us out. High school people with idiosyncratic ideas are too much trouble. You can’t teach the basics in one or two lines. And, at 77 years old, I’ll probably die with these ideas still in place. Nevertheless, I think you would enjoy my latest post about paradigm shifts: https://81018.com/
That is a homepage. The URL for that page when not a homepage is: https://81018.com/correct/
I hope you are well and fine and enjoying life. And, I wish you well with your work.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
PS: If you would like me to update our page about your work, tell us what needs to be added or subtracted and it’ll be done. https://81018.com/2020/03/25/visser/
Second 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.
Warmly,
-Bruce
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
This page URL is https://81018.com/2020/03/25/visser
First email: 29 August 2014 @ 7:01 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Visser:
We are just a bunch of silly high school geometry students and their occasional teacher (me) in need of some counseling. We have made some highly-speculative comments on wormholes that just seemed to jump off our pages with our work on interior, nested and combinatorial geometries using base-2 exponential notation from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe. We’ve charted the universe: https://81018.com/stem/
and https://81018.com/chart/
I hope you might share your first impressions with us.*
Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
*Hasn’t happened yet… guess we are just too idiosyncratic and thus easy to ignore. -bec
###