The Speed of Light Is “Close Enough” Using Just the Planck Units, then applying Base-2 Exponential Notation to Planck Time and Planck Length

Note: This article was first published in March 2015. This version has been updated several times in 2017 and 2018. The original version is preserved within the website (where it was first published): Small Business School.

Précis. By using Planck Length-and-Planck Time and the simplest mathematics (multiplication by 2), a speed of light is determined within each of 202 base-2 notations from Planck Time to the Age of the Universe. The experimentally-defined speed of light is 299,792,458 meters/second in a vacuum. Planck Length divided by Planck time equals 299,792,422.79 meters/second (using the SI units — these new SI base units were redefined in 2019 — where Planck Length  is 1.616255(18)×10-35 meters and Planck Time is 5.391247(60)×10-44 seconds). At one light second, the Big Board-little universe data is off by less than .1% from the experimental data.

Calculations. Yes, to date, the simple calculation, dividing Planck Length by Planck Time, renders 299,792,422.79 meters/second. In our initial count, over 160 notations are over 299,793,000 meters/second. The lowest calculation is within notation 76 which is 299,759,426.55 meters/second.

The fastest or highest calculation is within Notation 16 where it is at 299,982,157.27 meters/second.   The variable range, from a high of 299,982,157 to a low of 299,759,426, is just 222,720.72 m/second.

Ten percent of the total is 29,979,245.8 m/second. One percent is 2,997,245.8 meters per second. One-tenth of one percent is 299,724.58 meters per second.

Conclusion: The variations on the speed of light throughout all 202 notations is less than .1% of the speed of light measured in the laboratory in a vacuum.

Planck Numbers. These most-fascinating, magical numbers have been questioned since Max Planck introduced them in 1899. Largely ignored, the place of the Planck Base Units did not become a focus of the scientific community until Frank Wilczek (MIT, Nobel laureate, 2004) wrote a series of articles, Scaling Mt. Planck (Physics Today) back in 2001 and 2002 [1].

Yet, even today, these numbers are still questioned by many.

Looking for some boundary conditions within which to work, our New Orleans high school geometry class engaged the Planck Base Units as a starting point to construct their model of the universe [2]. Their primary operating assumption was that continuity and symmetry are the foundational concepts for universal constructions. As a geometry class they were looking to see how they could tile-and-tessellate the universe [3]. Our group found a bit of a correspondence between data derived from experimentation and data derived purely by mathematics using Planck Length and Planck Time.

There are three calculations that were particularly noted in the process of developing this base-2 chart of the basic Planck Units to their largest known values, particularly the Age of the Universe and the Observable Universe.

 1: The universe can be contained within 202 doublings of the Planck Length and the Planck Time [4]. An initial fact of applied Planck mathematics is that the entire known universe can be ordered in 202 necessarily-related groups by using base-2 exponential notation. The chart is simple to calculate; it was a project that started in a high school geometry class. Unlike Kees Boeke’s base-10 work in 1957 (also in a high school), this chart begins with the Planck Units and gets its order through the Planck Units and the base-2 progression as well as the observed-and-imputed, simple, embedded geometries [5] which adds another dimension of order, i.e. symmetry.

2: Between notations notation 143 and 144 is a light second.

Experimentally defined over the years [6], the small-scale and human-scale notations are in some manner of speaking archetypal. At one second we are looking at the raw universe just one second old. If the entire universe is dynamically adjusting itself, nothing is static, all notations are dynamic and active, we can begin to hypothesize at which notation visible light makes its appearance and then study the simple mathematics to discern why light speeds up or slows down within each notation.

3: There is much more to learn about the nature of light.

Though as noted earlier, the Planck Base Units were virtually ignored until MIT professor Frank Wilczek began his earnest study of them in Physics Today (June 2001) [9]. C. Alden Mead, who upon reading the Wilczek article, commented in the “Letters” section about his work back in 1959 that argued for the use of the Planck Length. Wilczek acknowledged that Mead had been an early pioneer to advocate for the use of the Planck Length [10] as part of experimental data.

It also seems that this approach of our New Orleans high school geometry class is a first. Senior editors of Wikipedia told me that they could no longer publish an article on their site because it was “original research.” Though readily admitting that this work is idiosyncratic, we have persevered since December 2011. By applying base-2 exponential notation, first we found no less than 202 doublings or groups. By dividing the entire scale in half, we found ourselves right in the middle of it all, a Human-Scale universe. By dividing in thirds, there was a natural division between the small-scale, human-scale, and large-scale universe. Within each scale and within each group, we know that there is much more to be uncovered. We have just started to open this door and are working to discover more.[11]

In 2002, Wilczek reflects, “It therefore comes to seem that Planck’s magic mountain, born in fantasy and numerology, may well correspond to physical reality.” [12]

Here our students and teachers conclude, “The space-time continuum is really real even when using discrete steps.”

References:

[1] http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/physics_today/phystoday/SMPIII.pdf PHYSICS TODAY, 2001 & 2002
[2] https:/81018.com/chart/#144
[3] https:/81018.com/chart
[4] https://81018.com/plancktime/
[5] https://81018.com/order/
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light#History
[7] https://81018.com/plancktime/#169
[8] https:/81018.com/chart
[9] http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/physics_today/…/SMPI.pdf
[10] http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/…/Alden-Repsonse323.pdf From American Institute of Physics, New York, NY, PHYSICS TODAY, S-0031-9228-0111-220-2, 2001 p15
[11] https://81018.com/2014/12/01/door/
[12] http://ctpweb.lns.mit.edu/physics_today/phystoday/SMPIII.pdf , PHYSICS TODAY, August 2002

Could the first 64-notations-out-of-the-202 be our common ground? Password: Common

CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY.GOALS.October.28-29,.2019HOMEPAGES: ASSUMPTIONS |DARK|HOME|INFINITY Inflation |KEYS|REVIEW|Transformation|Up

Common Grounds Despite Radical Diversity

by Bruce Camber

A First draft. It continues to be updated,

Introduction. One of my quiet goals in life has been to understand how concepts somehow transcend our diverse-and-sometimes-opposing points of view. Yet, nothing seems to work for groups of people who have been hating each other for centuries; peace-makers are hard-pressed to come up with a concept that heals such deep divisions.Tensions and divides are everywhere… and yes, these divides also exist within the sciences.

Over the years I have turned to a rather diverse group of scholars1 (going back into the 1960s) who have been wrestling with first principles and our understanding of the foundations of life and of our universe. Some of their concepts just might might help make a difference in the way we understand ourselves, our histories, our sciences and even our religions.

We started working on our base-2 chart of the universe in December 2011. It has become apparent to us that within this chart of 202 notations, there are many concepts that change our worldview and our views of space, time and infinity. We are aware of how idiosyncratic it is!

The first 64 notations out of 202 are most unusual. These may be common grounds of a most fundamental nature that might address age-old questions in physics and cosmology.

In 1899 Max Planck defined four fundamental natural units. He defined the numbers, but they were so unusual, he ostensibly ignored them. Only a few scholars1d picked up on his numbers over the next 100 years. In 2001 Frank Wilczek2 began to pull those Plank numbers free from numerology,3 and Planck’s base units began getting more consistent attention. Today, science tends to recognize the Planck units, i.e. their potential to become part of (1) an integrative theory about the nature of things, even a starting point for creation, and (2) the beginnings of complexity, a concept that helps us to understand the foundations of the sciences, mathematics, logic, and epistemology.

Geometries. Now, for a little perspective on our work, we were high school geometry people4 who in 2011 followed a very simple tetrahedral-octahedral complex5 back 45 steps (halving at each step) down among elementary particles and then another 67 steps to the Planck scale.Being rather naive about it all, we then decided to start with Planck’s base units and multiply by two (2). Sure enough, in 112 steps we were back in the classroom and in another 90 steps we were at the current expansion of the universe.6 We asked, “Did we just encapsulate everything, everywhere, for all time? …the entire universe in just 202 base-2 notations or doublings?

The Chart, A Map of the Universe. Although there are many blanks spaces, the chart seemed to be the beginning of a simple map7 of the universe using base-2 (doublings). We learned that the conceptual foundations of base-2 (exponential functions) were introduced to the world around 1740 by the Swiss mathematician, Leonhard Euler (there’s always so much to learn). Rather unwittingly, we took Euler’s base-2 to the 202nd power and have now begun to ask questions about its context in light of the nature of creation, space, and time.We had been unaware of the 1957 work by Kees Boeke in his private school, De Werkplaats, in Bilthoven, Holland. Boeke did his base-10 chart, Cosmic View: The Universe in 40 Jumps8 and over time it became sensationally popular.

Our chart is a bit different. First, we have our geometries. Second, we start with the Planck units. Third, we have a scale of the Planck’s units from the smallest units of space and time to the largest. Fourth, we have the current expansion of the universe within the 202nd notation. Fifth, our chart is 3.333+ times more granular than base-10. Sixth, this chart mimics life’s natural doublings. And seventh, our base-2 chart has a built-in, all natural inflation.9That is quite a lot, but then, it really began to challenge us:• Mathematical confirmation of the speed of light. We discovered between the 143rd and 144th notation, a simple mathematical confirmation of the speed of light,10 that validated both the distance and the time units.

That’s a key; it actually completes the simple logic of this chart. It has a mathematical, functional, and conceptual wholeness.

• Dark energy and dark matter defined. Looking further, we observed the first 64 notations couldn’t be reached by CERN laboratories in Geneva, Switzerland or by all the experts at the Max Planck Institute in Garching Germany; they have held the record11 for the shortest unit of measured time. Those first 64 notations are too short and too small to ever be measured by physical tools. So, what is all that aggregating mass and energy? A simple, logical conclusion: it is the “impossible-to-define” dark energy and dark matter.12 As we bring it into the light of day, I believe we will discover it is also our long-sought-for common ground.

Retrospective. Granted, that’s rather radical for simple people using simple logic. Yet, once opened for inquiry, this virtually unexplored domain of just over 64 notations looks like it can also give us the footings to create a bridge13 between quantum mechanics and general relativity, and between the Langlands programs and string theory. These are not incompatible concepts but different faces of a common foundation just before those few transformations that precede the 67th notation where particles and waves are finally observed.

In 1999 NATO gathered our most elite astrophysicists and cosmologists14 living at that time. All were scholars of structure formation. At no time did they have a discussion about the Planck base units. Nobody was asking, “What could be the earliest manifestation of the Planck base units?” For us, twelve years later in 2011, it was the only question we wanted to try to answer.

• Space-time defined by spheres.15

Looking around the scholarly world, it became obvious that we were unwittingly jumping on a bandwagon with Carlo Rovelli and Robert Muller who found space-and-time to be derivative, discrete and quantized. In our model, each notation builds on the prior notation(s). Each notation is part of the operational whole. Each is active and seemingly forever. Space and time are defined by pi (π), continuity, symmetry, and harmony. A simple circle, then a sphere, becomes a key nexus for transformations, all functions with qualities that describe (1) the infinite, (2) a finite-infinite bridge,15 and (3) the inherent quality and actual quantities that define the finite and our very first instant of time.

__________

This is such a different perspective.16 In a very rudimentary way we’re coming full circle. As I explore the common grounds between pi (π), space, time, continuity, symmetry and harmony, there are both quantitative and qualitative shared expressions. Taking a rather speculative leap of faith, I believe these are also the foundations of ethics and aesthetics.16

Of course, altogether too simple for most, I know this will be bit difficult to sell but as a people and global community, what are our options? …continue going on the way we are?Quantitative science, qualitative living.17

Some time ago, in one of my many statements online, I said it would be wise for science to be critical of theology. Science can inform theology, yet theology can also inform the sciences. There can be mutual respect. So, I asked, “What might we learn from the core insights from within religious beliefs?” To create an example, I went back into my family’s traditions. Given the Abrahamic faiths have the attention of about 57% of the world’s population (that includes Jews, Christians and Muslims as well as the Druze, Bahá’í and Rastafarians), an example of such respect might be this very different interpretation of the Genesis story shared by all Abrahamic faiths. The antithesis of disagreements, nastiness, and even violence. In the face of hostility, there is symmetry and harmony as a foundational understanding18 of the very nature of our very beingness. Given all notations are always active, what we consider to be history is the active encoding of our universe.

That is, I would conclude everything you say, do or think; it all impacts the look and feel and quality of our little universe.You make a difference. And, that difference is greater than one could ever imagine.#It is refreshing to find people out on the web who are also shining their light in these seldom visited spaces and who are open and joyful in the process. If you, or anybody you know, has such a vision, please let us know! We would enjoy meeting you online. Thank you. -BEC

__________________________
  • For more, go to these prior homepages:
  • A Simple Model – 12 points absorb the universe in 202 steps.
  • It’s been “top down” too long.  It’s time to build from the “bottom up”
  • Transformations – Cubic close packing, period doubling, Fourier transform

Common grounds — The first 64-notations

Every concept can be improved even if it seems complete unto itself

Questions, questions, and more questions

__________________________

Endnotes and Footnotes: (currently the most heavily edited area of this work)

1 Scholars: In less cynical times, most of us believed that the truth always rises. And, some of us have had great faith that scholars engage that truth most readily:

1a. The most recent scholars to whom I have turned (and a few have disappointed)

1b. 77+ scholars in 1979. The project was called “An Architecture for Integrative Systems.”

1c. Influential, today, such work does make a difference.

1d. Aggregating articles and papers about Max Planck’s base units. To date, these are most substantial that I’ve found. If you can add any to it, I would be grateful. -BEC

2 Frank Wilczek: In his Physics Today article, “Scaling Mount Planck II: Base Camp,” Wilczek says: “The strong and weak couplings equalize — at roughly the Planck scale! Planck, of course, knew of neither the strong nor the weak interaction, nor of quantum field theory and running couplings. The reappearance of his scale in this entirely new context confirms his intuition about the fundamental character of the Planck scale” (fifth paragraph).

These are not coincidences. Numbers are numbers. Functions are functions. And, as well, our chart of numbers tells an important story of our time. Here is a highly-integrated mathematical scaling of the universe. Academic openness and integrity should subject this new conceptual frame of reference to a rigorous analysis.

3 2004 Nobel Laureate and the Planck numbers: Wilczek’s three articles about the Planck base units in Physics Today stirred the pot; yet, when he received his Nobel Prize in 2004, all his writings took on a new vibrancy and importance. Wilczek became part of an elite group of celebrity physicists. His analysis of the Planck scale set these numbers apart in a most-special category even though there are other similar methods to generate fundamental numbers.

4-5 High school geometry people: Straying just a bit from the textbook, the teachers were fascinated with the way the octahedron and tetrahedron, two of Plato’s solids, were inextricably woven. Some of the students became equally fascinated. https://81018.com/home/ https://81018.com/tot/

6 Current Expansion, a chart: Starting with Planck Length in December 2011, Planck Time was added three years later, and Mass and Charge were added in February 2015. Today’s working chart emerged in April 2016. It was our first horizontally-scrolled chart whereby any one of the Planck numbers could be readily tracked. Notation 202 has a duration of 10.9816 billion years, and the current expansion defines the Now, this current moment of time which is shared everywhere throughout the entire universe. https://81018.com/chart/

7 Map of the Universe Using Base-2 (or doublings): Euler was a mathematician’s mathematician. He opened the way to infinitesimal calculus and a most-penetrating analysis of the infinite. We believe Euler will be instrumental in helping us interpret our charts. In 1988, 240 years after being published, one of Euler’s most seminal work, Introductio in analysin infinitorum (1748), was finally translated into English by John D. Blanton. Others quickly followed. We will be using an online translation by Ian Bruce. Of our 202 doublings, from the first notation to at least the 67th notation, could readily be considered infinitesimal. Our goal is to begin to understand the relation between the infinite and the infinitesimal, and we invite you on this journey with us.

8 Kees Boeke’s base 10 work. Here is a precedent for our work. In 1957 in a high school in Holland, headmaster Kees Boeke developed a wonderful teaching tool showing the relative sizes of things with his book, Cosmic View: The Universe in 40 Jumps. Within a short time, it had its champions and today it has become well-known through the world as an IMAX production and several online iterations. It appears that at no time did any scholar attempt to establish causal efficacy between successive notations.Using base-2, the challenge becomes apparent.

9 All Natural. With the work of Alan Guth (MIT) and so many others in the astrophysics community, the rapid expansion and continued inflation of the universe had become a major issue and stumbling block. Causal efficacy is stretched and strained. In the 1999 conference on structures, the most-elite inner circle of of cosmology threw up their hands and said, “Let’s come up with a better theory.”In our simple model a natural inflation is readily observed from the start. Several doubling mechanisms have been identified, however, the most-simple doubling, sphere stacking at the infinitesimal domains, could readily account for most all other doubling phenomenon.This explanation is sweet because it is so simple.

10 Speed of light. The electromagnetic spectrum in some sense of the word extends from Notation 1 to 202. Let us start a deep search of the literature that explores this bandwidth beyond the first possible visible light (within the 94-and-95th notations). What is the initial very, very small charge? Does each new sphere bring and equal charge and do these aggregate with each doubling? Within the chart of numbers, it is assumed that there is an aggregation because at one second, between the 143rd and 144th notations there is a mathematical confirmation of the speed of light.

11 Measuring an interval of light. The Max Planck Institute in Garching Germany has held the record for measuring the shortest interval of time. They are down into the attoseconds (10-18 seconds). It is a long way to go to get to Planck Time at 5.39116(13)×10-44 seconds. Our understanding of the current range is limited. It goes from the somewhat familiar nanoseconds (a billionth of a second) to picoseconds, then to femtoseconds, and finally into attoseconds. Beyond the attosecond there are zeptoseconds and the yoctosecond 10−24, but SI units recognize nothing smaller. References: https://81018.com/a84 https://81018.com/formulas/ https://81018.com/dark/

12 Dark energy-matter. Just look at the chart and observe the line for coulombs and the line for mass. Each notation “fills up” so every notation has a percentage of dark energy and dark mass. This would be the most simple explanation for dark energy and dark matter. A science writer was complaining, “I’m the only one who doesn’t have a dark energy and dark matter theory.” So, I wrote to her and said she would be most welcome to adopt ours as her own. You would be welcomed to do the same! Our first analysis, October 18, 2018, is here.

13 Bridges to build. For over 100 years there has been an insurmountable divide between quantum mechanics and relativity theory. Some of the smartest people on earth have been unable to create that bridge. First, all the big bang talk obscured the primary playing field. They now have 64 notations within which to work. It might also help if these exquisitely smart people would create a bridge between the Langlands programs and string theory. All the factors involved with those two bridges will also be involved in building a bridge between the infinitesimal and the infinite (another look). All key bridges, none have been built because the experts and scholars have not had room to think or breath. Most have been unaware of those 64 doublings with 19 prime numbers with which to work. Our scholars’ imaginations have been hamstrung with particles and waves.

14 NATO and Structure Formation. At the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge University, the consensus among the world’s best scholars was that the big bang theory needed to be revised. The net-net. These scholars departed from this conference and many engaged in multiverse speculations, and speculations, and speculations. George Ellis, who authored a seminal work (PDF) with Stephen Hawking in 1974, has an excellent commentary, Physics on Edge (Inference: International Review of Science, VOL. 3, # 2, AUGUST 2017), on the fractured belief systems among scholars who study these issues. That seminal work, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, was highly influential, but failed to understand the infinitesimal structure of space-time.

15 Bridge Finite-Infinite-Divide: Not often discussed, a Google search in October 2019 with delimiter quotes rendered just 674 results, most referring to a May 24, 2016 article in Quanta Magazine. By using the word, bridge, as a noun, i.e. the “Finite-Infinite Bridge,” Google pulled up just six results of which three are from our work here.Key words to explore further: Carlo Rovelli Robert Muller derivative, discrete and quantized. pi (π) continuity, symmetry, and harmony circle sphere a key nexus for transformations

16 May the circle be unbroken: Not often within this kind of discussion are the subjects of ethics and aesthetics engaged, however, within our exploration of concepts that can bridge the finite and infinite, continuity, symmetry and harmony were applied to replace absolute space and time. Within those three concepts an understanding of both aesthetics and ethics emerge.

17 Science & Theology: Too much “positional” time and energy is spent on this topic. Open questions should be clearly and carefully stated without all the positional gestures and maneuvers. We know there is incompleteness. We know that both sides of the equations have “stood their ground.” That is not enough.We need to do better. If we open up the dialogue of first principles in light of the first 64 notations, I predict that ground will be fertile. Not only will the Abrahamic faiths benefit, all religions including atheism, might discover common grounds. The creation story, the old Genesis story, can be opened up for all.

18 Universals: One of my earlier considerations of the emergence of constants and universals

Yes, work continues today, Saturday, October 26, 2019… thank you for your patience.One of the next articles for this site will use both expressions, Bridge Finite-Infinite-Divide, and Finite-Infinite Bridge in the title and subtitle. Comments? Please email me (BEC) or complete the form below.

Please send along your comments or questions:

__________________________

References, research, and resources:

Set TheoryZermelo-Fraenkel Set TheoryFuture Summary, WilczekArs ConjectandiTwelvefold wayThe zeta functionEuler’s formulaUnifying Lattice Models, Links and Quantum Geometric Langlands via Branes in String Theory, Meer Ashwinkumar, Meng-Chwan TanQuantum q-Langlands Correspondence Mina Aganagic, Edward Frenkel, Andrei Okounkov2007 – No time – Rovelli as seen in Discover magazine

Common Ground: Possibly 64-notations-of-the-202 are partially shared by everything, everywhere for all time

This page is “Common Ground” (July 2020): https://81018.com/foundational/
THIS PAGE IS IN PROCESS.  IT IS A REWORKING OF A PRIOR PAGE.
Prior page: October 19, 2019, https://81018.com/common/
First start of the rewrite: June 6, 2020,  https://81018.com/67-steps/
Consider: https://81018.com/langlands-programs/
A Simple Beginning: https://81018.com/concepts-parameters/
Summary page: https://81018.com/notations/

Two Primordial Mysteries

Introduction. Two primordial mysteries, (1) dark matter-and-energy and (2) the reasons for homogeneity and isotropy, have roots within 64 unexplored domains that start at the Planck base units and applied base-2 or doublings each successive notation to the wave-particle duality (and our understanding of quantum fluctuations).

The values of the base units were determined in 1899 by Max Planck. At that time, they were so unusual, even he ostensibly ignored them and only a few scholars1 picked up on his numbers for over years.

A key breakthrough in 2001, initiated by Frank Wilczek.2 pulled those numbers free from numerology,3 and open a path for more consistent attention. But even today, those numbers are not recognized as the first moment of time.

Even though the very nature of light is within these numbers, the numbers are still all but ignored. Just divide Planck Length by Planck Time and you’ll see that Planck was the earliest to confirm the speed of light within .1% of the laboratory measurements. That, too, is not recognized.

The path from the simplicity of those numbers to simple complexities that define us has not been analyzed. Here are the foundations of mathematics, logic, epistemology, ethics and value, all within these first 64 notations, waiting to be affirmed.

Geometries. The most simple sphere and the generation of the tetrahedral-octahedral complex4 has been somewhat understood since Kepler. Cubic-close packing of equal spheres was initiated, yet at no time was it applied to the infinitesimal.

Encapsulate everything, everywhere, for all time. The entire universe is defined by  just 202 base-2 notations or doublings. Our scale of the Planck’s units from the smallest units of space and time to the largest within 202nd base-2 notations changes the paradigm. Beside mimicking life’s natural doublings, here is a built-in, all natural inflation.

Across the entire chart, there is a mathematical confirmation of the speed of light.


[Current active editing: July 4, 2020]


Mathematical, functional, and conceptual wholeness

Dark energy and dark matter defined. Looking further, we observed the first 64 notations couldn’t be reached by CERN laboratories in Geneva, Switzerland or by all the experts at the Max Planck Institute in Garching Germany; they have held the record11 for the shortest unit of measured time. Those first 64 notations are too short and too small to ever be measured by physical tools. So, what is all that aggregating mass and energy? A simple, logical conclusion: it is the “impossible-to-define” dark energy and dark matter.12

As we bring it into the light of day, I believe we will discover it is also our long-sought-for common ground.Retrospective. Granted, that’s rather radical for simple people using simple logic. Yet, once opened for inquiry, this virtually unexplored domain of just over 64 notations looks like it can also give us the footings to create a bridge13 between quantum mechanics and general relativity, and between the Langlands programs and string theory. These are not incompatible concepts but different faces of a common foundation just before those few transformations that precede the 67th notation where particles and waves are finally observed.


In 1999 NATO gathered our most elite astrophysicists and cosmologists14 living at that time. All were scholars of structure formation. At no time did they have a discussion about the Planck base units. Nobody was asking, “What could be the earliest manifestation of the Planck base units?” For us, twelve years later in 2011, it was the only question we wanted to try to answer.

Space-time defined by spheres.15 Looking around the scholarly world, it became obvious that we were unwittingly jumping on a bandwagon with Carlo Rovelli and Robert Muller who found space-and-time to be derivative, discrete and quantized. In our model, each notation builds on the prior notation(s). Each notation is part of the operational whole. Each is active and seemingly forever. Space and time are defined by pi (π), continuity, symmetry, and harmony. A simple circle, then a sphere, becomes a key nexus for transformations, all functions with qualities that describe (1) the infinite, (2) a finite-infinite bridge,16 and (3) the inherent quality and actual quantities that define the finite and our very first instant of time.

__________

This is such a different perspective.16 In a very rudimentary way we’re coming full circle. As I explore the common grounds between pi (π), space, time, continuity, symmetry and harmony, there are both quantitative and qualitative shared expressions. Taking a rather speculative leap of faith, I believe these are also the foundations of ethics and aesthetics.16 Of course, altogether too simple for most, I know this will be bit difficult to sell but as a people and global community, what are our options? …continue going on the way we are?

Quantitative science, qualitative living.17 Some time ago, in one of my many statements online, I said it would be wise for science to be critical of theology.

Science can inform theology, yet theology can also inform the sciences. There can be mutual respect. So, I asked, “What might we learn from the core insights from within religious beliefs?” To create an example, I went back into my family’s traditions. Given the Abrahamic faiths have the attention of about 57% of the world’s population (that includes Jews, Christians and Muslims as well as the Druze, Bahá’í and Rastafarians), an example of such respect might be this very different interpretation of the Genesis story shared by all Abrahamic faiths. The antithesis of disagreements, nastiness, and even violence. In the face of hostility, there is symmetry and harmony as a foundational understanding18 of the very nature of our very beingness. Given all notations are always active, what we consider to be history is the active encoding of our universe.

That is, I would conclude everything you say, do or think; it all impacts the look and feel and quality of our little universe.You make a difference. And, that difference is greater than one could ever imagine.#It is refreshing to find people out on the web who are also shining their light in these seldom visited spaces and who are open and joyful in the process. If you, or anybody you know, has such a vision, please let us know! We would enjoy meeting you online. Thank you. -BEC

__________________________

For more, go to these prior homepages:

A Simple Model – 12 points absorb the universe in 202 steps.It’s been “top down” too long. It’s time to build from the “bottom up”Transformations – Cubic close packing, period doubling, Fourier transform

Common grounds — The first 64-notationsEvery concept can be improved even if it seems complete unto itself

Questions, questions, and more questions

__________________________

Endnotes and Footnotes:

[1] Scholars: In less cynical times, most of us believed that the truth always rises. And, some of us have had great faith that scholars engage that truth most readily:

1a. The most recent scholars to whom I have turned (and yes, a few have disappointed)
1b. 77+ scholars in 1979. The project was called “An Architecture for Integrative Systems.
1c. Influential, today, such work does make a difference.
1d. Aggregating articles and papers about Max Planck’s base units. To date, these are most substantial that I’ve found. If you can add any to it, I would be grateful. –BEC

 

[2] Frank Wilczek: In his Physics Today article, “Scaling Mount Planck II: Base Camp,” Wilczek says: “The strong and weak couplings equalize — at roughly the Planck scale! Planck, of course, knew of neither the strong nor the weak interaction, nor of quantum field theory and running couplings. The reappearance of his scale in this entirely new context confirms his intuition about the fundamental character of the Planck scale” (fifth paragraph).

These are not coincidences. Numbers are numbers. Functions are functions. And, as well, our chart of numbers tells an important story of our time. Here is a highly-integrated mathematical scaling of the universe. Academic openness and integrity should subject this new conceptual frame of reference to a rigorous analysis.

[3] 2004 Nobel Laureate and the Planck numbers: Wilczek’s three articles about the Planck base units in Physics Today stirred the pot; yet, when he received his Nobel Prize in 2004, all his writings took on a new vibrancy and importance. Wilczek became part of an elite group of celebrity physicists. His analysis of the Planck scale set these numbers apart in a most-special category even though there are other similar methods to generate fundamental numbers.

[4-5] High school geometry people: Straying just a bit from the textbook, the teachers were fascinated with the way the octahedron and tetrahedron, two of Plato’s solids, were inextricably woven.

Some of the students became equally fascinated. https://81018.com/home/ https://81018.com/tot/

[6] Current Expansion, a chart: Starting with Planck Length in December 2011, Planck Time was added three years later, and Mass and Charge were added in February 2015. Today’s working chart emerged in April 2016. It was our first horizontally-scrolled chart whereby any one of the Planck numbers could be readily tracked.

Notation 202 has a duration of 10.9816 billion years, and the current expansion defines the Now, this current moment of time which is shared everywhere throughout the entire universe. https://81018.com/chart/

[7] Map of the Universe Using Base-2 (or doublings): Euler was a mathematician’s mathematician. He opened the way to infinitesimal calculus and a most-penetrating analysis of the infinite. We believe Euler will be instrumental in helping us interpret our charts. In 1988, 240 years after being published, one of Euler’s most seminal work, Introductio in analysin infinitorum (1748), was finally translated into English by John D. Blanton. Others quickly followed. We will be using an online translation by Ian Bruce.

Of our 202 doublings, from the first notation to at least the 67th notation, could readily be considered infinitesimal. Our goal is to begin to understand the relation between the infinite and the infinitesimal, and we invite you on this journey with us.

[8] Kees Boeke’s base 10 work. Here is a precedent for our work. In 1957 in a high school in Holland, headmaster Kees Boeke developed a wonderful teaching tool showing the relative sizes of things with his book, Cosmic View: The Universe in 40 Jumps. Within a short time, it had its champions and today it has become well-known through the world as an IMAX production and several online iterations. It appears that at no time did any scholar attempt to establish causal efficacy between successive notations.Using base-2, the challenge becomes apparent.

[9] All Natural. With the work of Alan Guth (MIT) and so many others in the astrophysics community, the rapid expansion and continued inflation of the universe had become a major issue and stumbling block. Causal efficacy is stretched and strained. In the 1999 conference on structures, the most-elite inner circle of of cosmology threw up their hands and said, “Let’s come up with a better theory.”In our simple model a natural inflation is readily observed from the start. Several doubling mechanisms have been identified, however, the most-simple doubling, sphere stacking at the infinitesimal domains, could readily account for most all other doubling phenomenon.This explanation is sweet because it is so simple.

[10] Speed of light. The electromagnetic spectrum in some sense of the word extends from Notation 1 to 202. Let us start a deep search of the literature that explores this bandwidth beyond the first possible visible light (within the 94-and-95th notations). What is the initial very, very small charge? Does each new sphere bring and equal charge and do these aggregate with each doubling? Within the chart of numbers, it is assumed that there is an aggregation because at one second, between the 143rd and 144th notations there is a mathematical confirmation of the speed of light.

[11] Measuring an interval of light. The Max Planck Institute in Garching Germany has held the record for measuring the shortest interval of time. They are down into the attoseconds (10-18 seconds). It is a long way to go to get to Planck Time at 5.39116(13)×10-44 seconds. Our understanding of the current range is limited. It goes from the somewhat familiar nanoseconds (a billionth of a second) to picoseconds, then to femtoseconds, and finally into attoseconds. Beyond the attosecond there are zeptoseconds and the yoctosecond 10-24, but SI units recognize nothing smaller. References: https://81018.com/a84 https://81018.com/formulas/ https://81018.com/dark/

[12] Dark energy-matter. Just look at the chart and observe the line for coulombs and the line for mass. Each notation “fills up” so every notation has a percentage of dark energy and dark mass. This would be the most simple explanation for dark energy and dark matter. A science writer was complaining, “I’m the only one who doesn’t have a dark energy and dark matter theory.” So, I wrote to her and said she would be most welcome to adopt ours as her own. You would be welcomed to do the same! Our first analysis, October 18, 2018, is here.

[13] Bridges to build. For over 100 years there has been an insurmountable divide between quantum mechanics and relativity theory. Some of the smartest people on earth have been unable to create that bridge. First, all the big bang talk obscured the primary playing field. They now have 64 notations within which to work. It might also help if these exquisitely smart people would create a bridge between the Langlands programs and string theory. All the factors involved with those two bridges will also be involved in building a bridge between the infinitesimal and the infinite (another look). All key bridges, none have been built because the experts and scholars have not had room to think or breath. Most have been unaware of those 64 doublings with 19 prime numbers with which to work. Our scholars’ imaginations have been hamstrung with particles and waves.

[14] NATO and Structure Formation. At the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge University, the consensus among the world’s best scholars was that the big bang theory needed to be revised.

The net-net. These scholars departed from this conference and many engaged in multiverse speculations, and speculations, and speculations. George Ellis, who authored a seminal work (PDF) with Stephen Hawking in 1974, has an excellent commentary, Physics on Edge (Inference: International Review of Science, VOL. 3, # 2, AUGUST 2017), on the fractured belief systems among scholars who study these issues. That seminal work, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, was highly influential, but failed to understand the infinitesimal structure of space-time.

[15] Bridge Finite-Infinite-Divide: Not often discussed, a Google search in October 2019 with delimiter quotes rendered just 674 results, most referring to a May 24, 2016 article in Quanta Magazine. By using the word, bridge, as a noun, i.e. the “Finite-Infinite Bridge,” Google pulled up just six results of which three are from our work here.

Key words to explore further: Carlo Rovelli Robert Muller derivative, discrete and quantized. pi (π) continuity, symmetry, and harmony circle sphere a key nexus for transformations 16 May the circle be unbroken: Not often within this kind of discussion are the subjects of ethics and aesthetics engaged, however, within our exploration of concepts that can bridge the finite and infinite, continuity, symmetry and harmony were applied to replace absolute space and time. Within those three concepts an understanding of both aesthetics and ethics emerge.

[17] Science & Theology: Too much “positional” time and energy is spent on this topic. Open questions should be clearly and carefully stated without all the positional gestures and maneuvers. We know there is incompleteness. We know that both sides of the equations have “stood their ground.” That is not enough.We need to do better. If we open up the dialogue of first principles in light of the first 64 notations, I predict that ground will be fertile. Not only will the Abrahamic faiths benefit, all religions including atheism, might discover common grounds. The creation story, the old Genesis story, can be opened up for all.

[18] Universals: One of my earlier considerations of the emergence of constants and universals.

One of the next articles for this site will use both expressions, Bridge Finite-Infinite-Divide, and Finite-Infinite Bridge in the title and subtitle. Comments?

Please email me (BEC) or complete the form below.

Please send along your comments or questions:

Editor’s Notes
__________________________
References, research, and resources: Set Theory, Zermelo-Fraenkel Set Theory, Future Summary, Wilczek, Ars Conject and Twelvefold way, The zeta function, Euler’s formula, Unifying Lattice Models, Links and Quantum Geometric Langlands via Branes in String Theory,

Meer Ashwinkumar,

Meng-Chwan

TanQuantum

q-Langlands Correspondence

Mina Aganagic,

Edward Frenkel,

Andrei Okounkov

2007 – No time – Rovelli as seen in Discover magazine

The first 67 notations out of 202

Charting a study of just the first 67 keys

67 KeysIntroduction: The chart from the Planck base units to the wave-particle duality (and our first measurements of quantum fluctuations) requires 67 doublings of the Planck scale numbers. What we have within those numbers at the 67th notation  provides a new description of quantum fluctuations, another validation that there is cogency within our charts, and most significantly, 67 key notations where Langlands programs and string theories can be constructed.

There are many other studies that can also be included, everything from pointfree geometries, scalar field theory, dark energy and dark matter, and so much more!

A compilation of the following:

Working document to come:

https://81018.com/creating/ (very limited access until published) and that document will be used to continue to update https://brucecamber.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/camber-3u2.pdf which is https://81018.com/imperfection/ (May 2020)


Other websites and topics under review:

( All for the page: https://81018.com/imperfection/#11b )


Key Dates for The first 67 notations

This page was initiated on March 26, 2020
Posted online for collaborations: April 2, 2020
Last edit: Wednesday, July 1, 2020
This page is: https://81018.com/notations/
Related: https://81018.com/common//
The Universe As An Intimate Place: https://81018.com/alternative/

[15] Base-2 and Prime Numbers

Foundational Questions Institute: Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability Essay Contest (2019-2020) Support materials for the submission from Bruce Camber in April 2020. Last update: July 18, 2020.

Determinant becomes unpredictable, uncomputable, and undecidable (PDF)

[1] Decidability
[2] Computability
[3] Predictability
Transmogrification
[4] Undecidability
[5] Uncomputability
[6] Unpredictability
[7] First units
[8] Grand reductionism
[9] Triangulation
[10] Fourier
[11] Lorentz
[12] Poincaré spheres
[13] Planckspheres
One second: 299,792± km
[14] Automorphic forms
[15] Base-2 and Prime Numbers
[16] Aristotle’s Mistake
[17] Fuzzy Universe
[18] Scholars
Background: An FQXi call for papers has forced us to focus on the raw power of mathematics to anticipate the structure of real realities. If there is mathematical cohesion, there is probably a real physical reality that it describes. Matching them up and learning where and how such a unit of mathematical cohesion fits within the larger frameworks is the challenge. More

[15] Base-2 and Prime-Number Notations. We see the simple progression of numbers within our base-2 system. In light of it, how should we engage base-3? Wouldn’t that base-3 expansion necessarily be in sync with base-2? Might the expansion look more linear, going to Notation-201 in 67 jumps not just 3, 9, 27, 81?  If base-5 is necessarily related by the base-2 foundation, might it require 40 jumps to get to Notation-200?

Each prime number will require analysis. The mathematics and geometrics could vary from prime number notation to prime number notation. There may be different iterations. For example, would prime number 7 within the base-2 system move forward via Notations 14, 21, 28, 35, 42… and finally end up on Notation-196 in 28 steps?

Metaphorically speaking, perhaps we should think of these primes to be like an express train to its highest notation closest to 202, then a transfer on a local train, would then bring the effects into the present moment within Notation-202.

Again, let us ask, “What would be the effect of being necessarily tied to the base-2 platform?” Might it affect each base differently? A prime-number notation like 11 might be guided by its relation with base-2 to progress to Notation 198 (11×18) in 18 steps. Might there be a special equation of state at Notation 121 (11×11)? Prime number 13 might jump to Notation 195 in 15 steps. Would it also have some interactive qualities with the progression of 5?  17 jumps to 188 in 11, 19 jumps to 190 in 10, 23 to 184 in 8, and 29 to 174 in 6.

31 goes to 186 in six jumps. 37 goes to Notation 175 in five jumps. Just what is that passageway is anybody’s guess.

What happens with Notations-41, 43 and 47? How about 53,  59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, and 101?  The nineteen primes thereafter — 103, 107, 109, 113, 127, 131, 137, 139, 149, 151, 157, 163, 167, 173, 179, 181, 191, 197, and 199 — are themselves an especially unique place within the universe.

Each new notation initially replicates all prior notations, yet each evolves with its unique functionality.

Another key questions is about symmetry. Does each notation that is “completely filled” with planckspheres within its base-2 platform become fully symmetrical? Notation-202 which is being populated now as the current expansion, may well be literally filling up with planckspheres and is necessarily asymmetrical and directional.

Obviously, we are just being speculative, playing with ideas.

 

Base-2, multiplying by 2, doublings

Base-2 exponentiation: A simple doubling
may be at the heart of this universe.

We are beginning to understand why base-2 may be profoundly built into the very structure and deep nature of this universe.  Here are a few of the article about base-2 to date:

Could the first 64-notations-out-of-the-202 be our common ground?

Yellow ArrowRightArrowYellowCENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITYSYMMETRYHARMONY.GOALS.October.2019
HOMEPAGES: ASSUMPTIONS |DARK|HOME|INFINITY Inflation |KEYS|REVIEW|Transformation|Up

Common Grounds Despite Radical Diversity


by Bruce Camber  A First draft. It continues to be updated,

Introduction. One of my quiet goals in life has been to understand how concepts somehow transcend our diverse-and-sometimes-opposing points of view. Yet, nothing  seems to work for groups of people who have been hating each other for centuries; peace-makers are hard-pressed to come up with a concept that heals such deep divisions.

Tensions and divides are everywhere… and yes, even within the sciences.

My first-hand experience, grasped from a rather diverse group of scholars1 goes back into the 1970s. I had been wrestling with first principles, particularly our understanding of the foundations of physics (space, time, infinity) and of our universe. I expected that some of these scholars were working with concepts that just might help us break through old mysteries. Concepts could make a difference in the way we understand ourselves, our histories, our sciences and  even our religions.

Quite a bit later in December 2011, after many fits and starts, we began working on our base-2 chart of the universe. It has become apparent to us that within this chart of 202 notations, there are many concepts that change our worldview and our views of space, time and infinity. Rather quickly, we are aware of how idiosyncratic it is!

The first 64 notations out of 202 are most unusual. These may be common grounds of a most fundamental nature that might address age-old questions in physics and cosmology.

In 1899 Max Planck defined four fundamental natural units.  He defined the numbers, but they were so unusual, he ostensibly ignored them. Only a few scholars1d picked up on his numbers over the next 100 years. In 2001 Frank Wilczek2 began to pull those Plank numbers free from numerology,3 and Planck’s base units began getting more consistent attention. Today, science tends to recognize the Planck units, i.e. their potential to become part of (1) an integrative theory about the nature of things, even a starting point for creation, and (2) the beginnings of complexity, a concept that helps us to understand the foundations of the sciences, mathematics, logic, and epistemology.

Geometries. Now, for a little perspective on our work, we were high school geometry people4 who in 2011 followed a very simple tetrahedral-octahedral complex5 back 45 steps (halving at each step) down among elementary particles and then another 67 steps to the Planck scale.

Being rather naive about it all, we then decided to start with Planck’s base units and multiply by two (2). Sure enough, in 112 steps we were back in the classroom and in another 90 steps we were at the current expansion of the universe.6 We asked, “Did we just encapsulate everything, everywhere, for all time? …the entire universe in just 202 base-2 notations or doublings?

The Chart, A Map of the Universe. Although there are many blanks spaces, the chart seemed to be the beginning of a simple map7 of the universe using base-2 (doublings). We learned that the conceptual foundations of base-2 (exponential functions) were introduced to the world around 1740 by the Swiss mathematician, Leonhard Euler (there’s always so much to learn). Rather unwittingly, we took Euler’s base-2 to the 202nd power and have now begun to ask questions about its context in light of the nature of creation, space, and time.

We had been unaware of the 1957 work by Kees Boeke in his private school, De Werkplaats, in Bilthoven, Holland. Boeke did his base-10 chart, Cosmic View: The Universe in 40 Jumps8 and over time it became sensationally popular. Our chart is a bit different. First, we have our geometries. Second, we start with the Planck units. Third, we have a scale of the Planck’s units from the smallest units of space and time to the largest. Fourth, we have the current expansion of the universe within the 202nd notation. Fifth, our chart is 3.333+ times more granular than base-10. Sixth, this chart mimics life’s natural doublings. And seventh, our base-2 chart has a built-in, all natural inflation.9

That is quite a lot, but then, it really began to challenge us:

• Mathematical confirmation of the speed of light. We discovered between the 143rd and 144th notation, a simple mathematical confirmation of the speed of light,10 that validated both the distance and the time units. That’s a key; it actually completes the simple logic of this chart. It has a mathematical, functional, and conceptual wholeness.

• Dark energy and dark matter defined. Looking further, we observed the first 64 notations couldn’t be reached by CERN laboratories in Geneva, Switzerland or by all the experts at the Max Planck Institute in Garching Germany; they have held the record11 for the shortest unit of measured time. Those first 64 notations are too short and too small to ever be measured by physical tools. So, what is all that aggregating mass and energy? A simple, logical conclusion: it is the “impossible-to-define” dark energy and dark matter.12 As we bring it into the light of day, I believe we will discover it is also our long-sought-for common ground.

Retrospective. Granted, that’s rather radical for simple people using simple logic. Yet, once opened for inquiry, this virtually unexplored domain of just over 64 notations looks like it can also give us the footings to create a bridge13 between quantum mechanics and general relativity, and between the Langlands programs and string theory. These are not incompatible concepts but different faces of a common foundation just before those few transformations that precede the 67th notation where particles and waves are finally observed.

In 1999 NATO gathered our most elite astrophysicists and cosmologists14 living at that time. All were scholars of structure formation. At no time did they have a discussion about the Planck base units. Nobody was asking, “What could be the earliest manifestation of the Planck base units?” For us, twelve years later in 2011, it was the only question we wanted to try to answer.

Space-time defined by spheres.15 Looking around the scholarly world, it became obvious that we were unwittingly jumping on a bandwagon with Carlo Rovelli and Robert Muller who found space-and-time to be derivative, discrete and quantized. In our model, each notation builds on the prior notation(s). Each notation is part of the operational whole. Each is active and seemingly forever. Space and time are defined by pi (π), continuity, symmetry, and harmony. A simple circle, then a sphere, becomes a key nexus for transformations, all functions with qualities that describe (1) the infinite, (2) a finite-infinite bridge,15 and (3) the inherent quality and actual quantities that define the finite and our very first instant of time.

__________

This is such a different perspective.16 In a very rudimentary way we’re coming full circle. 

As I explore the common grounds between pi (π), space, time, continuity, symmetry and harmony, there are both quantitative and qualitative shared expressions. Taking a rather speculative leap of faith, I believe these are also the foundations of ethics and aesthetics.16 Of course, altogether too simple for most, I know this will be bit difficult to sell but as a people and global community, what are our options? …continue going on the way we are?

Quantitative science, qualitative living.17 Some time ago, in one of my many statements online, I said it would be wise for science to be critical of theology. Science can inform theology, yet theology can also inform the sciences. There can be mutual respect. So, I asked, “What might we learn from the core insights from within religious beliefs?” To create an example, I went back into my family’s traditions. Given the Abrahamic faiths  have the attention of about 57% of the world’s population (that includes Jews, Christians and Muslims as well as the Druze, Bahá’í and Rastafarians), an example of such respect might be this very different interpretation of the Genesis story shared by all Abrahamic faiths.

The antithesis of disagreements, nastiness, and even violence. In the face of hostility, there is symmetry and harmony as a foundational understanding18 of the very nature of our very beingness. Given all notations are always active, what we consider to be history is the active encoding of our universe.

That is, I would conclude everything you say, do or think; it all impacts the look and feel and quality of our little universe.

You make a difference. And, that difference is greater than one could ever imagine.

#

It is refreshing to find people out on the web who are also shining their light in these seldom visited spaces and who are open and joyful in the process. If you, or anybody you know, has such a vision, please let us know! We would enjoy meeting you online. Thank you. –BEC

###

__________________________

For more, go to these prior homepages:

  1. A Simple Model – 12 points absorb the universe in 202 steps.
  2. It’s been “top down” too long. It’s time to build from the “bottom up”
  3. Transformations – Cubic close packing, period doubling, Fourier transform
  4. Common grounds — The first 64-notations
  5. Every concept can be improved even if it seems complete unto itself
  6. Questions, questions, and more questions

__________________________  

Endnotes and Footnotes:

(currently the most heavily edited area of this work)

1 Scholars: In less cynical times, most of us believed that the truth always rises. And, some of us have had great faith that scholars engage that truth most readily:
1a. The most recent scholars to whom I have turned (and yes, a few have disappointed)
1b. 77+ scholars in 1979. The project was called “An Architecture for Integrative Systems.
1c. Influential, today, such work does make a difference.
1d. Aggregating articles and papers about Max Planck’s base units. To date, these are most substantial that I’ve found. If you can add any to it, I would be grateful. –BEC

2 Frank Wilczek: In his Physics Today article, “Scaling Mount Planck II: Base Camp,” Wilczek says: “The strong and weak couplings equalize — at roughly the Planck scale! Planck, of course, knew of neither the strong nor the weak interaction, nor of quantum field theory and running couplings. The reappearance of his scale in this entirely new context confirms his intuition about the fundamental character of the Planck scale(fifth paragraph).

These are not coincidences. Numbers are numbers. Functions are functions. And, as well, our chart of numbers tells an important story of our time. Here is a highly-integrated mathematical scaling of the universe. Academic openness and integrity should subject this new conceptual frame of reference to a rigorous analysis.

3 2004 Nobel Laureate and the Planck numbers: Wilczek’s three articles about the Planck base units in Physics Today stirred the pot; yet, when he received his Nobel Prize in 2004, all his writings took on a new vibrancy and importance. Wilczek became part of an elite group of celebrity physicists. His analysis of the Planck scale set these numbers apart in a most-special category even though there are other similar methods to generate fundamental numbers.

4-5 High school geometry people: Straying just a bit from the textbook, the teachers were fascinated with the way the octahedron and tetrahedron, two of Plato’s solids, were inextricably woven. Some of the students became equally fascinated. https://81018.com/home/ https://81018.com/tot/

6 Current Expansion, a chart: Starting with Planck Length in December 2011, Planck Time was added three years later, and Mass and Charge were added in February 2015. Today’s working chart emerged in April 2016. It was our first horizontally-scrolled chart whereby any one of the Planck numbers could be readily tracked. Notation 202 has  a duration of 10.9816 billion years, and the current expansion defines the Now, this current moment of time which is shared everywhere throughout the entire universe. https://81018.com/chart/

7 Map of the Universe Using Base-2 (or doublings): Euler was a mathematician’s mathematician. He opened the way to infinitesimal calculus and a most-penetrating analysis of the infinite. We believe Euler will be instrumental in helping us interpret our charts. In 1988, 240 years after being published, one of Euler’s most seminal work, Introductio in analysin infinitorum (1748), was finally translated into English by John D. Blanton. Others quickly followed. We will be using an online translation by Ian Bruce. Of our 202 doublings, from the first notation to at least the 67th notation, could readily be considered infinitesimal. Our goal is to begin to understand the relation between the infinite and the infinitesimal, and we invite you on this journey with us.

8 Kees Boeke’s base 10 work. Here is a precedent for our work. In 1957 in a high school in Holland, headmaster Kees Boeke developed a wonderful teaching tool showing the relative sizes of things with his book, Cosmic View: The Universe in 40 Jumps. Within a short time, it had its champions and today it has become well-known through the world as an IMAX production and several online iterations. It appears that at no time did any scholar attempt to establish causal efficacy between successive notations.

Using base-2, the challenge becomes apparent.

9 All Natural. With the work of Alan Guth (MIT) and so many others in the astrophysics community, the rapid expansion and continued inflation of the universe had become a major issue and stumbling block. Causal efficacy is stretched and strained. In the 1999 conference on structures, the most-elite inner circle of of cosmology threw up their hands and said, “Let’s come up with a better theory.”

In our simple model a natural inflation is readily observed from the start. Several doubling mechanisms have been identified, however, the most-simple doubling, sphere stacking at the infinitesimal domains, could readily account for most all other doubling phenomenon.

This explanation is sweet because it is so simple.

10 Speed of light. The electromagnetic spectrum in some sense of the word extends from Notation 1 to 202. Let us start a deep search of the literature that explores this bandwidth beyond the first possible visible light (within the 94-and-95th notations). What is the initial very, very small charge? Does each new sphere bring and equal charge and do these aggregate with each doubling? Within the chart of numbers, it is assumed that there is an aggregation because at one second, between the 143rd and 144th notations there is a mathematical confirmation of the speed of light.

11 Measuring an interval of light. The Max Planck Institute in Garching Germany has held the record for measuring the shortest interval of time. They are down into the attoseconds (10-18 seconds). It is a long way to go to get to Planck Time at 5.39116(13)×10-44 seconds. Our understanding of the current range is limited. It goes from the somewhat familiar nanoseconds (a billionth of a second) to picoseconds, then to femtoseconds, and finally into attoseconds. Beyond the attosecond there are zeptoseconds and the yoctosecond 10−24, but SI units recognize nothing smaller. 

References: https://81018.com/a84 https://81018.com/formulas/ https://81018.com/dark/

12 Dark energy-matter. Just look at the chart and observe the line for coulombs and the line for mass. Each notation “fills up” so every notation has a percentage of dark energy and dark mass. This would be the most simple explanation for dark energy and dark matter. A science writer was complaining, “I’m the only one who doesn’t have a dark energy and dark matter theory.” So, I wrote to her and said she would be most welcome to adopt ours as her own. You would be welcomed to do the same! Our first analysis, October 18, 2018, is here.

13 Bridges to build. For over 100 years there has been an insurmountable divide between quantum mechanics and relativity theory. Some of the smartest people on earth have been unable to create that bridge. First, all the big bang talk obscured the primary playing field. They now have 64 notations within which to work. It might also help if these exquisitely smart people would create a bridge between the Langlands programs and string theory. All the factors involved with those two bridges will also be involved in building a bridge between the infinitesimal and the infinite (another look). All key bridges, none have been built because the experts and scholars have not had room to think or breath. Most have been unaware of those 64 doublings with 19 prime numbers with which to work. Our scholars’ imaginations have been hamstrung with particles and waves.

14 NATO and Structure Formation. At the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge University, the consensus among the world’s best scholars was that the big bang theory needed to be revised. The net-net. These scholars departed from this conference and many engaged in multiverse speculations, and speculations, and speculations. George Ellis, who authored a seminal work (PDF) with Stephen Hawking in 1974, has an excellent commentary, Physics on Edge (Inference: International Review of Science, VOL. 3, # 2, AUGUST 2017), on the fractured belief systems among scholars who study these issues. That seminal work, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, was highly influential, but failed to understand the infinitesimal structure of space-time.

15 Bridge Finite-Infinite-Divide: Not often discussed, a Google search in October 2019 with delimiter quotes rendered just 674 results, most referring to a May 24, 2016 article in Quanta Magazine. By using the word, bridge, as a noun, i.e. the “Finite-Infinite Bridge,” Google pulled up just six results of which three are from our work here.

Key words to explore further:  Carlo Rovelli   Robert Muller    derivative, discrete and quantized.   pi (π)  continuity, symmetry, and harmony    circle   sphere  a key nexus for transformations

16 May the circle be unbroken: Not often within this kind of discussion are the subjects of ethics and aesthetics engaged, however, within our exploration of concepts that can bridge the finite and infinite, continuity, symmetry and harmony were applied to replace absolute space and time. Within those three concepts an understanding of both aesthetics and ethics emerge.

17 Science & Theology: Too much “positional” time and energy is spent on this topic. Open questions should be clearly and carefully stated without all the positional gestures and maneuvers. We know there is incompleteness. We know that both sides of the equations have “stood their ground.” That is not enough.We need to do better. If we open up the dialogue of first principles in light of the first 64 notations, I predict that ground will be fertile.  Not only will the Abrahamic faiths benefit, all religions including atheism, might discover common grounds. The creation story, the old Genesis story, can be opened up for all.

18 Universals:  One of my earlier considerations of  the emergence of constants and universals

Yes, work continues today, Saturday, October 26, 2019… thank you for your patience.


One of the next articles for this site will use both expressions, Bridge Finite-Infinite-Divide, and  Finite-Infinite Bridge in the title and subtitle. Comments? Please email me (BEC) or complete the form below.


Please send along your comments or questions:

Editor’s Notes

__________________________

References, research, and resources:


Initiated in private on Thursday, October 19, 2019
Publicly Posted: Saturday, October 20, 2019
A first draft homepage: Sunday, October 21, 2019
Most active editing: October 19 to October 21, 2019

An analysis of the 202 notations or doublings of the Planck base units

By Bruce Camber (November 2018) RE: Analysis of our horizontally-scrolled chart

We backed into our map of the entire universe defined by 202 geometric and mathematical relations.

by bruce camber (October 2018)

History. This website began back in December 2011 with work in a high school geometry class in New Orleans. We had first observed how the tetrahedron is perfectly filled with four half-sized tetrahedrons (one in each corner) and an octahedron (revealing one triangular face in the center of each of the four faces of the tetrahedron). We then observed how the octahedron was perfectly filled with six half-sized octahedrons (one in each corner) and eight tetrahedrons (one in each face). We observed how the two objects together perfectly fill space, theoretically tiling and tessellating the universe. The question was asked, “How far within can we go?”  By filling each tetrahedron and octahedron with smaller and smaller tetrahedrons and octahedrons, we discovered the smallest limits. By multiplying each by 2, and the result by 2, over and over again, we reached the upper limit,

Once we defined those boundaries, we began re-examining the processes.

202 notations or doubling or groups or steps. In just just three steps within, we had so many tetrahedrons and octahedrons, we turned to paper! Within just 45 steps going within, we were down into the sizes that CERN Labs (Geneva) measures. Within another 67 steps within, we were facing the Planck Wall and realized that this is where Zeno had also finally reached a limit.

When we multiplied our objects by 2 to get bigger, we were equally surprised that we reached the approximate size of the universe in just over 90 steps, all successive doublings. That we mapped the entire universe in 202 doublings with geometries and multiplication by 2 was as satisfying as it was mystifying.

Mystery. First, we couldn’t find any references to it on the web! We did find Kees Boeke’s base-10 and that was some comfort, but where is our more granular base-2? How could something so simple be new?

Then we asked the question, “Does this geometry represent anything in reality?” It is symbolic, of course, but in many different ways, it is also observable. We’ve kept that question open.

A STEM Tool. Now, both surprised and a bit perplexed, we asked,”What can we do with this nascent model?” We decided to share our map of the universe with other schools. For us, it seemed like an excellent STEM tool.

To summarize, in this first mapping of the universe, we de facto discovered the Planck Length, base-2 notation, a rather overwhelming continuum of geometries, and a delightful way of ordering information along a scale of the universe.

But, we still had a lot of work to do. First, we started to learn about the other Planck base units. How would they track with the Planck Length expansion? We could not even begin to guess. We are told that we live in an expanding universe, so we realized that we would have to keep track of the top numbers and the expansion. We also asked, “What comes before the Planck units?”

We didn’t have a clue.

It took us three years to be somewhat convinced that what we did was original. So far, all that we know is that we backed into a base-2 chart of the universe and have now started to learn about the Planck base units…

Return to the chart

______

Related Webpages

December 2011:

Learning Geometry

Original chart

Working Index

January 2012:

Early Questions

First Overview

Early ideas

2013:

Letters to
Scientific American

Wikipedia Rejection

Simple facts

2014:

Start Simply

Big Bang Questioned

Planck Time

2015:

Planck Mass &
Planck Charge

Big Bang Questioned

2016:

Chart of the Universe
AAAS Science
Magazine rejection

The first 64 notations of 202: Redefining the Infinitesimal

CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIESCONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY  • USAGOALS • OCTOBER 2018
HOMEPAGES:  JUST PRIOR|GROWTH|GRAVITY|Open Letter|PI|Transformation|ORIGINAL
1-8202 notations outline the universe; 64 are below thresholds of measurement, eight displayed above.

Possibilities for New Explorations

BY BRUCE CAMBER  Initiated: 1 October 2018  ALSO: ANALYSIS, CHART, COMMONSENSECONCEPTS, CONTINUUM, EFFICACY, EMERGENCE, FUNCTIONS, GROWTHGRAVITY,  Letter, & Next

Précis. There are no less than the first 64 notations or doublings of the Planck base units that are well below the current thresholds of length or time measurements. These 64 notations redefine the meaning of the infinitesimal. The total of 202 doublings from the Planck units to the Age of the Universe are not yet recognized by the academic-scholarly community; so of course, the first 64 of the 202 doublings have not been considered. Related: Why now?

History.  In 2001 Frank Wilczek (MIT, Nobel 2004)  wrote about Max Planck’s base units. In 1899 Planck was trying to envision the most-simple expressions that define space, time, mass and energy. The numbers are all natural units generated by properties of nature and not from human constructs per se. Though largely ignored for over 100 years, as a result of Wilczek’s publication of three articles, Scaling Mt. Planck (I, II, & III), Planck’s numbers were studied more closely. Today, these numbers are key parts of our work within the foundations of physics. See: Frank Wilczek

Dynamics. The Planck numbers do not stand alone. Each comports with the dimensionless constants that define them. There is a natural thrust and inflation within (1) Planck Charge, (2) light, and (3) all the never-ending, never-repeating dimensionless constants beginning with π. There is a natural doubling (see image below), an emergence and definitions of space-time. Each doubling expands possibilities for complexity. This is especially true with each prime-number notation. There are 18 primes up to the 64th doubling and each opens possibilities of increasingly complex mathematics, geometries and logic.   Related: What’s thrust?

Hypotheses: These 64 notations represent the following:

  • Sphere to tetrahedron-octahedron coupletSphere-packing. A progression of mathematics and geometries starts with the Planck base units at Notation #0 which first manifest as spheres. Further hypothesized is  sphere packing, then the emergence of the simplest geometries as displayed, then projective and Euclidean geometries, and then all other geometries including non-Euclidean and a natural unfolding of mathematical structures including the Langlands programs and computer automaton (and others – See line 11).
  • String theory.  The radius and diameters of the spheres harbor the earliest mathematics of string theory and virtual particles. Further hypotheses just might be developed with actual string theorists. This will be the only way that we could possibly integrate their mathematics within these first 64 notations. Do they have an analogue to dynamic sphere packing (above)? Can it be carried from the simplest geometries as a localization of a general theory of mathematical structures, then on to the AdS/CFT correspondence, and perhaps even to M-theory, branes, and dualities? Why not? Can we include the Calabi–Yau manifold? Work by Seiberg, Witten, Langlands, and Weinberg will continue to be further engaged. Also, other parts of this exploration that are being studied include the work of Yang-Mills and spontaneous symmetry breaking.
  • Planck’s Simple Definition of Light. The actual math of line 10 of the horizontally-scrolled chart suggests a variable speed of light from one notation to the next. Within 1% of the experimentally-defined speed and less than .01 % at the one-second mark, in some measure, this line item encourages a much deeper analysis of the entire chart. More…
  • The foundations for isotropy and homogeneity throughout the universe: With just 202 mathematical-and-geometrical doublings, highly-integrated and interdependent, the basis for isotropic and homogeneous measurement has a natural and simple causality. A special page will eventually be developed to expand this comment further.
  • The actual simple base-2 mathematics for dark energy and dark matter: Ratios of Mass-Charge-Time-Length from the 1st notation to the 64th notation will be compared and contrasted with the Mass-Charge-Time-Length ratios of neutron stars and blackholes. The hypothesis is that by the 202nd notation, these ratios will come into concert with current measurements of their ratios. That mathematical work is now being engaged and summations (formulas) will emerge. 

Thank you. -BEC

Of course, your comments, questions, and suggestions are all most welcomed. This exploratory started very simply within a high school geometry class in New Orleans, USA. Although we are not shy to embrace the largest and smallest of concepts, certainly our ability to interpret their place, position and the dynamics within the history of scholarship is still young and rather naive. Thanks again.

Referenced web pages of earlier statements going back to 2012:
https://81018.com/2012/03/31/notations/
https://81018.com/plancktime-2/
https://81018.com/hypostatics/
https://81018.com/hypostatic/
https://81018.com/seconds/


Navigation Notes:

  1. Homepages: Scroll to the very top of the page. Cursor over the word HOME and a very long drop down menu will be displayed. It can be scrolled. There is a link to every homepage within this site from its inception in September 2016. Alternatively, click on the word HOMEPAGES just under the Center for Perfection Studies. To return to the current homepage, click on Our Universe in 202 Doublings which is at the top of every page.
  2. Two small arrows, one pointing left and other right. If you see these arrows, the left arrow goes back to the prior homepage and the right arrow goes to the next homepage. The words, Just Prior, are on many homepages and it will go back to the prior homepage as well.  The image goes to the horizontally-scrolled chart as does its tagline.
  3. Values and ethics:  Within our study of universals and constants, there is a sense of value that gives rise to values and ethics. The antithesis is nihilism which eventually opens us all to the various forms of dystopia we are experiencing today.

The current struggle: Who will lead us? Who can break the impasse?

Might the seven First Ladies of the oldest trade routes in our world break the impasse?

________________

More key evocative questions:

Back in my very early days atSynectics Education Systems (1971-    ), in the days of analogies and metaphors, one of the most important activities was trying to grasp key evocative questions. Here are a few of those questions explored within this site:

  1. What are the fundamental units that define our universe?
  2. Does each progression represent the “longest possible” continuum?
  3. Are any big bang theories necessary in light of a natural inflation?
  4. Is our intellectual depth being constricted by our two Standard Models?
  5. Shall we revisit our structure for scientific revolutions?
  6. Can these concepts be tested using rather simple formulas?
  7. Does measurement qua measurement actually begin with pure math and logic?
  8. Is “infinitely-hot, infinitely-dense, infinitely-small” the wrong place to start?
  9. What is the deep nature of growth?
  10. Are our imaginations working overtime?
  11. What is an inertial frame of reference in light of 202 notations?
  12. Are some concepts first principles”?
  13. Can Turok, Arkani-Hamed or Tegmark open a new frame of reference?
  14. What is pi that we are mindful of it?
  15. Ask the penultimate questions:  What is finite? What is infinite?
  16. Are we asking enough “what if” questions?
  17. Who is on our team? To whom do we turn?
  18. What has been the driving vision?
  19. What is the fabric of the universe?
  20. Are there rules for our roads?  What are they?
  21. Is the universe exponential? Is Euler’s identity spot on?
  22. Is this model built on something even faster than exascale computing?
  23. Does the universe go on forever or just as far as the current expansion?
  24. Is there a better way to keep track of all these writings?
  25. Who among us is really and truly in a dialogue with the universe?
  26. Why?  Then as a child, ask the question again, Why? And again, ask, “Why?”
  27. Have there been summaries of these ideas? What have we missed?
  28. Are the 202 doublings still a virtually unexplored area for research?
  29. The arrogance of language: How do we know what we know and don’t know?
  30. What are the most important qualities of infinity?
  31. Does the original homepage (January 2012) anticipate today’s activities?

Join us. Challenge us. Help us. We need all the help we can get!


An excellent resource to translate any of our pages by its URL:
http://itools.com/tool/google-translate-web-page-translator


If you liked this page and website, please do not hesitate to follow us on Twitter or Linkedin.


Our visitors come from many countries (a snapshot on October, 2018)


Among today’s challenges:

1. The Tesseract.  First tweet: @tesseractband OK, smart folks. How do you live up to your name? You make every performance a teaching event. The Tesseract is somehow involved in these 202 base-2 notations that bind the universe: Let’s figure it out and you all be the evangelists.

2. Extend the simple reference to consciousness. See Witten.

 

 

 

On using base-2 from the Planck base units versus big bang theories

Yellow Arrow
CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITYSYMMETRYHARMONYUSAGOALS • March 2019
HOMEPAGES: Assumptions|Dark|Emerge|Infinity|Intro|Max|Review|Scholars|WEINBERG|ORIGINAL
1-36
36 of 202 base-2 exponential notations from the first moment of time to the current age of the universe.

BY BRUCE E. CAMBER FEBRUARY 2019 Just Prior: Unified Theory?|Ask Scholars?|ASSUMPTIONS?|INFINITY?|MORE

A Fraction Of A Second Difference

Comparison. The key difference between the big bang theories and our base-2 Quiet Expansion is about one picosecond  (just 10-12 seconds or one trillionth of a second).  The following chart was buried in a larger June 2016 document. It has been extracted so we can focus on the differences between the models and then begin to explore the connections with the two Standard Models.

Who? What? Why?
When? Where? How?

Who: The history of big bang cosmology (bbt) is highly documented. It is an intellectual cornerstone within experimental and theoretical physics, cosmology, and astrophysics.

What: To challenge the bbt appears foolhardy at best. Yet, there are many, many reasons to challenge it, but most of all because (1) it is overly complex and confusing, (2) it is not very good philosophy, and (3) it is very poor psychology.

Why: The first three key parts of the bbt, involving substantially less than a trillionth of a second, are based on hunches and a need to shoehorn data to support the model.

Wikipedia says, “Planck scale is beyond current physical theories; it has no predictive value. The Planck epoch is assumed (or theorized) to have been dominated by quantum effects of gravity.”

We say that the Planck scale is the starting point for the initial six notations (de facto defined by the bbt) and that these notations are shared by everything, everywhere in the universe. Painfully aware of the limitations of our vocabulary, these first notations are considered to be archetypal forms, structure and substance. Archetypal is used in the sense of the original pattern or model by which all things of the same type are representations, the prototype, or a perfect example. For more, see all of 202 encapsulating notations (opens in a new window or tab).

Both models have made key assumptions. We believe the QE model is internally more consistent, imaginative, and stimulating.

This “Singularity” Is a Meeting Place of Converging Formulae, perhaps also known as a Modulus-or-Nexus of Transformation

Keys to this Quiet Expansion: More than the big bang theory‘s four forces of nature — gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force, and the weak force — within this Planck scale we assume these four are encapsulated within all four Planck base units and the constants that define them, and some manifestation of this unification is carried throughout all 202 notations. And, as we have noted, the Planck base units are defined by length, time, mass,  and charge; and, these are further defined by the speed of light (or special relativity), the gravitational constant (or general relativity), the reduced Planck constant (or ħ or quantum mechanics), the Coulomb constant (or ε0 or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or kB or of temperature).

The Planck scale is not beyond logic, numbers, and conceptual integrity. Simple logic and simple math rule. Homogeneity and isotropy are the results. Within the Quiet Expansion (QE) model, we have applied that simple logic somewhat arbitrarily by placing Planck Temperature at the top of the scale, just beyond the 202nd notation and then dividing by 2, it goes down approaching Absolute Zero. We are ready to adjust it at any time when a more integrative logic prevails! Also, we are increasingly finding a simple relational logic between the four original  Planck base units. Notwithstanding, this logic will be constantly revisited throughout our ever-so-slow development of QE model.

Within the QE model, the Planck Charge, a Coulombs value, is taken as given. Within the big bang theory (bbt), the Planck Charge is ignored. The bbt value is as large as possible. Their measurement is given in GeV units, one billion electron volts. Add 1016 zeroes and you have quite a charge.

To begin to understand all these numbers and their correlations, questions are asked, “Are these all non-repeating, never-ending numbers like Pi? Are all numbers that are non-repeating and never-ending somehow part of the infinite yet also the beginning of quantum mechanics?” The suggestion has been made that we carry out each of the Planck numbers at least 10 decimal places, and if need be, 100 decimal places, and possibly even 1000 decimal places, to see if patterns can be discerned. We recognize that relative to other units of measurement, such as the SI base quantities, the values of the Planck units are approximations mostly due to uncertainty in the value of the gravitational constant (G).

The QE model holds that things are simple before complex and everything is related to everything. Imputed, hypostatized and/or hypothesized are pointfree vertices and simple geometries as the deep infrastructure that gives rise to the work on combinatorics, cellular automaton, cubic close packing, bifurcation theory (and the Feigenbaum’s constants), Langlands program, mereotopology (point-free geometry), the 80-known binary operations, and scalar field theory. Here are people working on theories and constructions of the simple, yet their concepts are anything but simple.

Big Bang Theory (bbt)

Planck epoch

Planck time:

<10−43 seconds

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Planck Temperature:

1032 Kelvin

First key bbt error

Planck Energy:

1019 GeV

Second bbt error

Grand Unification

Epoch

<10−36 seconds~
1016 GeV
(gigaelectronvolts)

Third bbt error

Inflationary

Epoch and

Electroweak

Epoch

<10−33 s to <10−32 seconds

1028 K to 1022 Kelvin

Expansion: 1026 meters

Editor: “Science Fiction”

Fourth bbt error~

QuarkEpoch

>10−31 to

>10−12 seconds

1012 Kelvin

We sync the QE time to the bbt time.  The temperature scale is now beginning to sync as well.

Hadron Epoch

10−6 seconds to

10−1 seconds

1010 Kelvin to

109 Kelvin

Lepton Epoch

1 second to

10 seconds

109 K

Note: QE temp higher

Photon Epoch

(Nucleosynthesis)

10 seconds to

103 seconds to

1013 seconds~

1011 Kelvin to

109 Kelvin to

103 Kelvin

10 MeV to 100 keV
Note: Seeking expert help.

Matter-dominated

era

47 ka (47,000 years) to

10 Ga (10×109) years~

104 Kelvin to

4 Kelvin

Recombination

380 ka (380,000 years)~

4000 Kelvin

Dark Ages

380 ka to 150 Ma (Mega-annus)

or 150 million years

4000 Kelvin to

60 Kelvin

Stelliferous Era

150 Ma (150 million years)

100 Gab (150 billion years)

60 Kelvin to 0.03 Kelvin

Reionization

~150 Ma to

1 Ga (1 Billion)~

>60 K to 19 K

Galaxy formation

and evolution

1 Ga to 10 Ga

19 Kelvin to 4 Kelvin

Dark-energy

dominated era

>10 Ga

Present time

13.8 Ga

2.7 Kelvin

Quiet.Expansion.(QE)

Notations 0-6

Planck base units

Planck time:

5.39106×10−44 seconds

 ≈ 4.4×10-27 (K)

Temperature: Derivative

of the base units?

1.8×10-18 Coulombs

2.176×10-8 kilograms

1.61×10-35  meters

Notation 7 to 34

7:  6.901×10−42  (s)

31: 1.157×10−34 (s)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
4.02×10-9 Coulombs

A simple natural inflation

Notation 35 – 40

35:  6.44×10-8 Coulombs

40: 2.06×10-6 (C)

35: 1.852×10-33  (s)

40: 5.927×10−32 (s)

Note: QE syncs to bbt time

2.42×10-17 (K)

35: 5.55×10-25 meters

40:  1.77×10-23 (m)

Notation 41-104

41: 1.18×10−31 seconds

104: 1.09×10−12 (s)

41: 4.84×10-17 Kelvin

104: 4.47×102 (K)

(Please note: 310K is equal to  98.33°F, 36.85° C. That’s special.

Notation 105142

105: 2.18×10−12 (s)

142: 3.0×10−1 (s)

105: 8.94×102 Kelvin

142: 6.14×1013 (K)

Notation 143147

143: 6.01×10−1 (s)

147: 9.61 (s)

143: 2.45×1014 Kelvin

147: 3.93×1015 (K)

Notation 147-154187

147: 9.6185 seconds
154: 1231.1 (s)
187: 1.05×1013 (s) or
or 320± thousand years
147: 3.932×1015 Kelvin
154: 5.03×1017 (K)
187: 4.32×1027 (K)
147: 3.346×1026 (C)
154: 4.28×1028 (C)
187: 3.67×1038 (C)

Notation 184– 201

Cosmology emerges!

184: 41,919.31 years

201: 10 billion years

184: 5.4×1026 Kelvin

201: 7.0×1031 (K)

Notation 187

320± thousand years

3.6×1038 (C)

4.3×1027 Kelvin

Notation 187-196

196: 171.2± million years

5,414,779,502,320,000 sec

2.2×1030 (K)

Approaching Planck Temperature

Notation 196-199

196: 171.2± million years

199: 1.27 billion years

Notation 196-199

196: 171.2± million years

199: 1.27 billion years

Note:

.Notation 199-202

199: 1.27 billion years

203+: Way-Distant future

7.08×1031 Kelvin

Notations 1-202

The dark-energy dominated era is being evaluated in light of the first 64 notations, the derivative natural of time, and homogeneity and isotropy.

Notation 202+

13.8 billion years

Approach Planck Temperature

When: In the very beginning…

Wikipedia says that the Planck epoch requires speculative proposals, a “New Physics” such as “…the Hartle–Hawking initial state, string landscape, string gas cosmology, and the ekpyrotic universe.” Each is a conceptually-rich, dense jungle of ideas. Cutting through that entanglement is only for the highly-motivated and academically astute. Most of us will just go on to the grand unification epoch, in search of a logical system that builds consistently upon itself.

About the bbt model, Wikipedia simply says, “The three forces of the Standard Model are unified.” Of course, the QE goes much further, however, first consider a bbt problem. Electromagnetism, gravitation, weak nuclear interaction, and strong nuclear interaction are most often related to relations defined above the 65th notation.

Wikipedia says, “Cosmic inflation expands space by a factor of the order of 1026 over a time of the order of 10−33 to 10−32 seconds.[1] The universe is supercooled from about 1027 down to 1022 kelvin.[6] The Strong Nuclear Force becomes distinct from the Electroweak Force.” [1] (Our emphasis) First, consider that the Planck Temperature is 1.41683×1032 Kelvin. The bbt appears to skip the cooling from 1032 to 1027 Kelvin and it uses bubbly magic to address what causes the cooling to 1022 Kelvin. Also, consider the amount of expansion and the short duration assumed in their statement above. To create that much space in that short of an interval would require light to travel so far beyond its normal speed; it would constitute the penultimate anomaly (Pardon us, Sean Carroll fans).

Also, because the bbt begins at the Planck Temperature, they truly need a supercooled concept. Within the Quiet Expansion model the temperatures from notations 1 through 102 are all superconducting, being well below the superconducting transition temperatures. Perhaps the very concept of temperature will become better understood as a result of our struggles to define a different model of the universe.

About this inflationary epoch, Wikipedia says, “The forces of the Standard Model have separated, but energies are too high for quarks to coalesce into hadrons, instead forming a quark-gluon plasma. These are the highest energies directly observable in experiment in the Large Hadron Collider.”

Within the QE, the quark-gluon plasma which requires 1012 Kelvin, is between notation 135 and 136, 9.6008×1011 Kelvin to 1.92016×1012 Kelvin respectively. Notation 136 is 4.6965×10-3 seconds from their space-time “singularity.” One second is between Notations 143 and 144. Also, the Kelvin scale is counter-intuitive in many ways. The temperature of the Sun is about 5,778 K. Within the QE, that is expressed between Notations 107 (3.5765×103 K ) and 108 (7153.178 K). The human temperature at 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit is 310.15 Kelvin which is between Notations 103 and 104 (447.073 K). Also, at Notation 103 the Planck Length is now .163902142 millimeters or 1.63902142×10-4 meters or about the size of a human egg.

  1. How did it all begin? And, what does it mean? (January 2011)
  2. Quiet Expansion of the Universe (June 2016)
  3. A Chart: Our working, horizontally-scrolled chart is a most-simple, integrated model of the universe.
  4. Notations 1-202: An analysis notation by notation has just begun!
  5. Planck base units from 0 at the beginning to today: https://planckbaseunits.wordpress.com/