Editor’s Note: This page started on Saturday, July 30, 2022; it is very much in process.
Quantum Fields, Geometric Fluctuations, and the Structure of Spacetime, 21 Sep 2018 (v1), last revised 17 Dec 2020 (v4)
S. Carlip, Department of Physics, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
R. A. Mosna and J. P. M. Pitelli, Departamento de Matematica Aplicada, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 13083-859, Campinas, Sao Paulo, Brazil
First email: Sunday, August 1, 2022
TO: Joao Paulo Manoel Pitelli
cc: Ricardo A. Mosna, Steve Carlip
Your work — Carlip–Mosna–Pitelli — regarding geometric fluctuations has come to my attention. There are not too many articles that have geometry and quantum fluctuations in the same sentence. So, very quickly, I saved it out so I could read it at my leisure and study all your references.
Now a friend of mine from Boston University, Patricio Letelier, was a Chilean mathematical physicist and professor at University of Campinas (UNICAMP). I created a Wikipedia entry about him (see: View History, August 20, 2019) a few years ago. I suspect you knew him or knew of him.
Patricio got his PhD; I went back into a business that I had started six years earlier so my background within academia is incomplete. I returned to that early work quite by accident when helping a nephew by taking his geometry classes for a few days. That was back in 2011. We were having fun with embedded geometries when we rather unwittingly uncovered the fact that there are just 202 base-2 notations from the Planck scale to the current time (and size of the universe). We thought it was a good STEM tool. For years, the first 64 notations up to particle physics eluded us. We could not imagine what was there. Then, we learned a little about Langlands programs and I returned to memories of late night discussions about string theory with Patricio. More recently I uncovered an octahedral gap commensurate with the five tetrahedral gap. Together they struck me as a possible gate in quantum computing. I also began thinking about transitions to non-Gaussianity within those first 64 notations.
I fully agree that our work is entirely odd, a wiffle ball coming out of left field. But I thought you’d be interested to see this page about that it: https://81018.com/geometries/ Of course, I would be most fascinated with your initial comments, no matter how harsh or direct you’d like to be!