Menas Kafatos, Chapman University, Orange, CA

ArXiv
Homepage(s) Chapman Chopra
inSPIRE^HEP
Publications: Limitations of Observational Cosmology
Twitter
Wikipedia
YouTube

Most recent email: May 24, 2021 @ 3:32 PM

Dear Menas Kafatos:

We are in our wisdom years and you’re just two years ahead of me. About a year ago, I introduced myself to you: https://81018.com/2021/05/24/kafatos/ I’ll be building on that page slowly

I began following the work of Deepak Chopra when he was practicing in Stoneham (Massachusetts) and I was living in Melrose (abutting town) and working on the foundations of physics and theology with Abner Shimony, Robert Cohen and his gang at Boston University (1973-1981). Somebody had given me an early copy of one of Deepak’s manuscripts and we corresponded once or twice.

Even at that time I was hung up on a moment of perfection in space-time and the place of continuity (order), symmetry (relations), and harmony (dynamics).

Of course, you may never have seen my earlier note or you didn’t want to deflate our little balloon and say, “Just numbers.” Notwithstanding, we continue our trek: http://81018.com is always the most current work.

I would enjoy hearing from you just to know that the connection has been made.

Best wishes,

Bruce

First email: May 6, 2020, 2:22 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Menas Kafatos:

Congratulations on all that you do. Such a remarkable life.

Your Wikipedia entry is sensational. Regarding your work on new perspectives for the self organization of the universe, I wonder if you might comment on our entirely idiosyncratic work that began in 2011 in a high school geometry class!

Instead of absorbing the night skies over Crete, we went inside Plato’s cave. We were studying the tetrahedron (and the octahedron within it), and caught Zeno’s spirit. Dividing the edges by 2, connecting the new vertices, we did this over and over and over again until we were down to the Planck Length.

In 45 steps we were in the range of particle physics and in another 67 steps we were within the Planck scale. Of course, the next day we multiplied by 2, and we were shocked to find the rest of the universe within just another 90 jumps or doublings. Eventually the work of Kees Boeke came to our attention. Long ago I enjoyed the company of old friends, Phil and Phyllis Morrison of MIT, who popularized Boeke’s work (we didn’t engage it at that time).

It took awhile, but by 2014, we added Planck Time, and in 2015 we added Planck Mass and Charge and then made a horizontally-scrolled chart in 2016.

Taking just those numbers to create 202 base-2 notations, is it meaningful? I hope you think it is, but we are prepared to hear, “It’s just numbers!” Thanks.

Warmest regards,
Bruce

---