People who have been following your very impressive career hope that you are well and that your life is good.
This note is to suggest that your work on gluinos and squarks is still studied in light of all our hypothetical particles. One might conclude, “There has got to be an easier way.”
When I wrote to you in March 2019, we were hoping to learn if you had any hypotheses or projections about the size of a gluino and squark. Our base-2 mathematical grid begins with the Planck base units, applies base-2 notation, and encapsulates those hypothetical particles within a notation; I am guessing Notation-64 up to and including Notation-67. Our hypothesis is that here the Planck unit expressions are just below the measuring ability of our devices. The 202 notations from the Planck Time to the current time each projects a type of symmetry function. The core of this theory begins with an analysis of the qualities of pi. This key dimensionless constant begs the question, “Is it finite or infinite?” Yet, as we contemplated the qualities of pi, it seemed like the best description of the infinite and infinity. Those qualities are continuity, symmetry, and harmony.
I was hoping that with your unique background, you might comment on that for us.
Congratulations on your work; you are surely on a road less traveled!
From Muzaffargarh to Lahore to Trieste then CERN, Kansas and Oregon, your Mom must be exhausted although thrilled to see how your mind has carried you so far and so fast. If you stop for a moment, you will have to admit that it is breathtaking.
I made reference to your work in a note to Dr. Amina Obaid Ramadhan Alhajri, the deputy director in Rahat, and I have always been told to share information whenever one writes or talks about another person. My note to Dr. Ms. Alhajri was also sent to Ms. Catarina Moleiro (pasted just below). Ms. Moleiro is part of the Coimbra Group, a consortium of EU universities and a joint effort of Portugal’s Coimbra University and the EU. Also, you will see a reference to your CERN colleague, Hafeez Hoorani. He was the scientific director of the SESAME Project (Jordan) and is now head of NCP (Islamabad).
Now, my question is simple for you but difficult for me regarding squarks and gluinos. There is an introductory overview online. At the bottom of that Wikipedia page, there is a chart, Particles in physics. Everything in the white space could have a length measurement of some kind. It is very difficult to get that length measurement.
Would you guess for me? What would be the smallest possible length represented there among the gluinos, squarks, gravitino, winos, etc.? Thanks so much.
Most sincerely, Bruce
PS. Excellent direct quote from you: “Knowing the secrets about beginning and evolution of universe and understanding the basic constituents of matter and interactions between them has always been the utmost desire of human beings.” -B
From: Bruce Camber Date: Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 10:04 AM Subject: Please forgive my presumptions… To: Dr. Amina Obaid Ramadhan Alhajri Cc: Ms. Catarina Moleiro
Dear Dr. Amina Obaid Ramadhan Alhajri:
One might ask, “How far away is night from day.” Literalists might figure about 12 hours or perhaps around “X” kilometers. Surely from Coimbra to Rabat or Fez might qualify. Yet, in today’s world, an idealist might say, “An eternity divides night and day” and, of course, be right because in the perfections of eternity, nothing divides us.
Given your appreciation and encouragement of scientific pursuits, it behooves all of us to encourage a deeper understanding of science. Perhaps the “deepest” exploration is up at CERN labs in Geneva where scientists like Dr. Mansoora Shamim and Hafeez Hoorani (SESAME Project and NCP) have had an impact.
Notwithstanding, I write to both of them because there is a simple, universal logic that remains unexplored that goes even deeper than today’s particle physics. That is, there is general concurrence today that the Planck base units just might be the place where we should start a mathematical inquiry about our infinitesimal universe. From that scale to the CERN scale for particle physics there is a “huge” gap. If you were to double the size of a Planck unit (10-35 meters), then double each result again and again, there would be no less than 64 doublings before we reach the “area” in which CERN and other accelerators measure (10-15 meters). That gives our logicians and mathematicians an extraordinarily large domain within which to work.
All schools might benefit by taking a little time to explore and further open this domain. It is the domain between the finite and infinite and it might help us all understand this world and universe just a little better. Thank you.
Most sincerely, Bruce
PS. Because I copied you on my note to Ms. Catarina Moleiro of the Coimbra Group, I have copied her on this note to you. Given your shared interests, you probably know each other well. Of course, it has been a joy to learn about the work that the two of you are doing. BTW, would you want to see a copy of my notes to Mansoora Shamim and Hafeez Hoorani? -B
Note: On Sunday, November 16, 2019, I sent a note to Mansoora Shamim through her LinkedIn account to see if she had ever received this email or copies of those above. I have had no confirmation that any email, tweet, or message has ever been received. -BEC
Update (Wednesday, September 9, 2020): This morning I noticed that this page, which has very, very little traffic, had been displayed no less than six times in morning! At that point I added the image from 2003 from a Kansas State physics department’s newsletter. This afternoon, I discovered that this page had been displayed another seven times! That deserves a special message: “Welcome people who are interested in the work of Mansoora Shamim. Please let me know that she is alive and well. My suspicion has been that her mom was ill and she had to return to Pakistan to tend to family needs. Yes, her pictures and her limited published work conveys a very special person who surely would not fail her family. -BEC
“Dr. Mansoora Shamim is a scientist who has worked at CERN in Geneva Switzerland. Born is Muzaffargarh, Pakistan, she got her bachelors degree from Lahore college for Women in 1995 with a Rolls of Honor, a masters degree in Physics from the University of Punjab, Lahore in 1998, securing second position among all students from the province of Punjab.
“She studied at the Abdus Salam ICTP, Trieste from 1999 to 2000, where she was awarded a one-year scholarship to complete the postgraduate diploma course in theoretical high-energy physics.
“In 2001, she joined graduate school at Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kansas and obtained a Ph.D degree in experimental particle physics in 2008. During her Ph.D, Dr. Shamim analyzed the data collected by the D0(D zero) experiment at Fermilab, Tevatron. Her Ph.D thesis was written on a search for scalar top quark in events containing jets and missing energy. Link to publication http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269308005911
“From July 2008 to June 2014, Dr. Shamim has worked as a post doc for the university of Oregon in Eugene. She was based at CERN working on the ATLAS experiment, where she served as the responsible person for data quality monitoring for tau trigger from 2009-2010. From March 2010-Feb 2012, she served as deputy convener as well as the convener of the tau trigger group. The data used in the discovery of Higgs boson were collected using tau triggers in three different channels.
Thousands upon thousands of scientists and scholars have focused on one or more of the hypothetical particles. In this section of this website, we will begin to focus on the work of a few of them. To date, we have begun to study the work of Frank Wilczek with his axion and anyon, Alan Guth with his inflaton, Dr..Mansoora Shamim, a Pakistani postdoc who introduced us to squarks and gluinos, and Jogesh Pati with his preons.
From among Wikipedia’s listings, there are many more hypothetical particles. All lists are incomplete. Here, the first link will always go to the Wikipedia overview and the second link to our listings of primary articles by scholars. There may be just one (1) article yet as many as ten (10). Always, you will be invited to rank order your top three articles — the three most informative for you. You will also be able to include articles not listed here.
Kurt Riesselmann, PhD Managing Editor, Creative Services Manager, Public Information Manager, Deputy Head Symmetry magazine, Fermilab Office of Communications Batavia, Illinois 60510
Thank you, Dr. Kurt Riesselmann, for all your writing at Fermilab and for Symmetry magazine. My focus has been on your July 21, 2015 article on the Standard Model of Particle Physics. Very early in my first read, I had these questions:
Abstract. Most everything starts simple. Our base-2 outline of the universe starts with the first instant of space-and-time (for now, we’re using Planck’s base units, taken-as-given, and assumed to manifest as a primordial sphere). Calculated with dimensionless constants, Planck’s units also define a rate of expansion. The role of pi, the finite-infinite relation, basic geometries, and quantum fluctuations are explored. Issues within big bang thinking are also explored within this alternative model. -BEC
Introduction: Eight key points constitute the foundations of this emergent model of the universe: (1).Key Numbers, (2).Key Geometries, (3).The Heart of Dynamics, (4).Finite-infinite and all their dimensionless constants, (5).Perfections, (6).Imperfections, (7).Mind-values-consciousness, and (8).Everything, everywhere, for all time. A discussion about each point follows.
1. Numbers are used to grasp continuities, order, and time.
Numbers define: Assumed are primordial numbers like those calculated by Max Planck (1899) and by George Stoney (1874). Scholars like John Ralston (University of Kansas, 2021) advocate for new calculations based on current knowledge, yet Planck’s results create a conceptual basis for working parameters and boundaries. The numbers can always be tweaked. Taken as a given, his numbers give us a place to start. Though in part metaphorical, we have a starting point of the universe. With the calculation of the age of the universe, we also have an endpoint; one might call it “Today” or perhaps “Right now” or even the “current point.”
Also, between the smallest number and largest number is every possible second and every infinitesimal part of every second. It is all encapsulated, accounted, and grouped; and, simple boundaries and largest-possible scale are established. [1]
2. Geometries are used to grasp symmetries, relations, and space.
Shapes define the look-and-feel of the first instant. Lemaître intuited a primordial atom. Within our emerging theory, it is an infinitesimal primordial sphere defined by dimensionless constants starting with pi (π). Pi reaches beyond the finite and provides our first look at the nature of the infinite. Pi, a key dynamic ratio, is never-ending and never-repeating, always the same and always changing. Everybody knows pi but none of us know it very well.
Geometries at work. In 2011 in our high school geometry classes, we chased tetrahedrons and octahedrons, going within, smaller and smaller. From our classroom model to the Planck length there were just 112 base-2 steps by dividing the edges by 2 and connected the new vertices until we were about as small as Planck’s length.
Then, when we multiplied Planck Length by 2, there were 112 steps to the classroom and just 90 more stepsto the edges of the universe. Our workingchart of 202 notations began to emerge in 2014. We then engaged the far-reaching Langlands programs. We studied a bit of string theory and M-theory. But, when we finally learned about cubic-close packing (of equal spheres), we began thinking that we just might be onto a different model of the universe. Ours had simple numbers, well-explored and generally-understood concepts, and potentially every possible geometry from the first instant, i.e. the very start of the universe.[2a]
Within the heart of our geometries. Planck’s infinitesimal numbers pushed us into a very different logic. Here dimensionless constants dominate. And among all the constants, pi dominates. Then we identified three facets of pi, continuity, symmetry, and harmony. How could such a dimensionless constant be finite? Is “never-ending and never-repeating” finite?
Intuiting the essence of pi. Quickly we ran into the closed-or-open universe debates. So, we postulate that the universe is finite and infinity is totally other. We postulate that infinity is the source for pi and the other dimensionless constants such that pi reaches between the finite and the infinite. Then, we postulate that pi’s first finite manifestation is a primordial sphere — the first sphere and first thing in the universe.
Imputing boundaries and boundary conditions. Base-2 is a most simple means to sort all the seconds and parts of a second that define our universe. Symbolically and analogically, we’ve used Planck’s numbers from his 1899 calculations to create our working chart of the universe. And yes, the result is the 202 notations to encapsulate the universe — all time, all space, everything, everywhere. Like a DNA sequence, numbers define and shapes define. [2b]
3. And, dynamics are used to grasp continuities-symmetry in motion.
We assume all notations are always active. Each builds on the prior; therefore, only the current notation has time asymmetry. That key issue is being addressed in several ways, albeit it’s one of our youngest issues among many open issues within this emerging theory. [3a]
The number of notations, of course, is not the key. The concept of a grid from the first moment to this day is. Again, using Planck Time, we go from the first moment to the first second (Notation-143) to the first light year (Notation-169), and then to 370,000 years (Notation-187) for recombination, to 300 million years (Notation-196) for large-scale structure formation, to the first billion years within Notation-198 to this very time right now (Notation-202). And, yes, these numbers outline aether theories which would include lattice Higgs theories!
The stacking and packing of spheres is a key activity and a natural inflation. By following the progression of Planck Charge and Planck Mass, we find that there is more than enough heat for the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP) between Notations 134-and-135. Using Euler’s base-2 exponential notation, from a cold start (very close to absolute zero), the QGP begins within the first second.[3b]
Natural Inflation: One primordial sphere per primordial unit of length. The thrust for an expanding universe starts with one primordial sphere per unit of primordial time. If the expansion is then calculated for just the first second, using Planck’s base units, PlanckTime generates 539-tredecillion spheres per second. StoneyTime generates 4605-tredecillion spheres per second. Those numbers are necessarily woven together with Planck Mass, Planck Charge, and the speed of light.
4. We assume a necessary, always-active, finite-infinite relation.
Finite-infinite. Many scholars say that infinity is messing up science. Perhaps their concept of infinity is incomplete. Perhaps they do not think about the origins of dimensionless constants. Now, we have a very large number of infinitesimal primordial spheres per second coming from somewhere. If we say “infinity” most scholars will have a problem. Yet, if we say that pi is the concrescence of continuity, symmetry and harmony, and that looks like a sphere, there will be fewer problems. If we say that the qualities of continuity, symmetry and harmony define the infinite, I believe we should stop and contemplate that.
Think. Reflect. Be gracious… because that is exactly what is being asked of every scholar-scientist-student.
Infinitesimals. Creating a transitional logic, infinitesimals challenge us to begin to grasp the dynamics between the finite and infinite. If on one hand we open the definition of the infinite and on the other we radically limit its scope, we might begin to understand how infinitesimals relate to strange things like blackholes, singularities, multiverses, and all our hypothetical particles proposed over the years.
Science is the continuity and symmetry that start within the sphere. And, science is also the harmony that is found deep within the sphere’s Fourier Transform. Continuity has simple values: order… memory. Symmetry has more complex values: relations… balance. And harmony has the most complex values: continuities-and-symmetries in motion. It is life, consciousness, and perhaps all our other values, even hope and love.
Categorically, infinity is continuity, symmetry and harmony, nothing more and nothing less. All metaphorical, confessional, or personal language is left to the individual. We can respect each other’s privacy and personal beliefs; we are hoping that you can respect ours as we search for the most simple truth; and for us, that opening line of this paragraph seems to be it for now.
5. We assume domains of perfection...
In the face of quantum fluctuations. In light of the 202 notations, the focus is first between Notation-64 and Notation-67, a range within which current research detects fluctuations. It begs the question about what is happening between Notations 1-and-64. If cubic-close packing is generating basic geometries within densities that are on the order of neutron stars (based on Planck’s numbers), one can imagine that only the most efficient combinations of points, lines and geometries manifest. There is a thrust of simple perfections; yet, there are also many more factors to analyze that could interrupt a flow of the geometries of a simple perfection. [5]
6. We assume domains of imperfection (quantum fluctuations).
One possible indeterminacy that could give rise to quantum fluctuations is the gap created by five tetrahedrons sharing a common edge. If systems begin to manifest around Notation-50, there could be many notations where indeterminacy prevails but is too infinitesimal to be measured..[6]
7. There’s a place on this grid for the Mind-consciousness-values.
Further considering the continuity, symmetry and harmony within pi. Throughout our brief history as a civilization, the wise among us have said something like, “Truth sets you free.” Surely the best of science has empowered us. The best of science has liberated the human mind. Yet, freedom is a rather value-laden word and I would argue that at its core, science begins with the continuity that we first find within the sphere.
Pi, spheres, infinitesimals and notations are well-known parameters within science yet at no time have those parameters been applied to the first instance of the universe. The progression, Notation 1-to-64, have not been formally engaged. Within one of our early charts, we made groups of ten notations and postulated Forms (like Langlands programs and automorphic forms) develop in the first ten notations, 2-11. Archetypal Structures develop in the next ten, from Notations 11-20. Archetypal Substances developed in the next ten, Notations 21-30. Here within these thirty notations might be the hypothetical particles that mirror the particles within the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) model and the Standard Model for Particle Physics. From Notations 31-40, Archetypal Qualities, were given a place along the grid. And from Notations 41 to 50, Archetypal Relations, were postulated. From those five groups, Archetypal Systems were then postulated (Notations 51-60). Here within these notations was the beginning of systems theory, the Mind, consciousness and values. It is all physical. Yet, the physical systems measured by our most sensitive devices like the Large Hadron Collider can only measure effects from around Notation-65 and larger.
So, within those 65 notations, perhaps even more boldly, we will continue to consider further how these infinitesimal spheres manifest the Fourier transforms and all other integral transforms. These dynamics are so rich, surely here are the very keys for electromagnetism and gravity and the yoke that ties them together. [7]
Our history is so short, so minuscule, and we’re on a step learning curve. And, describing this infinitesimal universe has been problematic. Now, we are not scholars, certainly not a cosmologist nor astrophysicist. We are high school people, but that has not stopped us from discovering Tim N. Palmer of Oxford and his work with Invariant Set Theory, or Simon White of the The International Max Planck Research School on Astrophysics in Munich who is developing a Cold Dark Matter paradigm.
We have asked for advice from many people — “What are we doing wrong?” We have so many more questions. [8]
Where pi has continuity from the first moment of time to the current time, phi (φ) has a very different ordering principle that appears to be limited within each notation. There may be other kinds of fluctuations where these two ordering principles seat together. It is ideation that is currently being explored.
Many brilliant scholars have been working on these problems from quite a different perspective. None have acknowledged the simple outline created by the 202 base-2 notations. To say the least, our first 64 notations are enigmatic. Although infinitesimal, Notations-65-to-67 are on the edge of our measuring capabilities of our finest instruments (i.e. the LHC, CERN, Geneva).
We recognize how idiosyncratic such statements are. For many our work would naturally be characterized as crackpottery. Yet, this is just our beginning. If we take the base units as defined by Planck or Stoney, densities are in the range of neutron stars and blackholes. It is a very different picture of our expanding universe. Yet, the enigmatic and idiosyncratic may be necessary to open new paradigms of who we are and why.
Concepts and ideas. On my path, I have met a few of our finest living scholars. All struggle. It’s never easy even though a few make it look easy. Many of us do not have the finesse of others and our work is written off too quickly. There are so many ways to interpret a data set like the chart of 202 notations. When the data doesn’t cohere or leaves questions unanswered, theories provide temporary work-arounds. Our theory has been known by many names. Big Board-little universe captured the sense that space and time are disintermediated and the two need to be redefined. Quiet Expansion was our simple way to distance ourselves from the Big Bang. Yet, the most descriptive was “the Mathematically-Integrated View of the Universe.” This model, to my knowledge, is the only one that outlines the universe with mathematics — both numbers and geometries — with causal efficacy from the first instance to this very moment. It is based on unique assumptions and presuppositions. Once all 30 of our presuppositions have, in some manner, been engaged, we believe there could be a profound intellectual awakening and possibly a resurgence of ethics. -BEC
[1] Boundaries & Parameters. First we have a start time 13.81 billion years ago. Then we have our current time. Just like DNA, every moment has its special numbers that identify it within the universe. Every instant using base-2 is part of key continuity equations. Like Emma Iwao’s 31 trillion digits of pi (31,415,926,535,897) that are never-ending and never-repeating (always changing and always the same), here is the heart of our horizontally-scrolled chart of the universe. Of course, the first continuity equation is Planck Time to the current time. Planck Length to the size of the universe is next. Then, Planck Mass to the total mass of the universe and Planck Charge to the total charge in the universe follows. It is a bit too much to grasp and its veracity is questioned and explored throughout this website.
Keep questioning everything. We get bored and dull if we don’t. For many years (and within some quarters, even today) if you questioned the big bang, you’d be laughed out of the room. Part of our problem is our arrogance that cuts off intellectual discussion. For example, many scholars are sure that science is value neutral. That’s just a bit of silliness. Its deepest definitions exude value and values. Eventually we’ll realize that we have adopted old constructs that impede our thinking and our sciences. Here are three: • Hawking’s infinitely-hot big bang start holds us back. It blocks a cold start. • Newton’s cosmology of absolute space and time suffocates us. It blocks the current point. • Aristotle’s failures with geometry truncate creativity. It blocks our grasp of indeterminacy and creativity.
[2a] Geometries have been making a comeback. Topology, shape theory, representation theory, category theory, Langlands programs, string theory (M-theory) and supersymmetries (SUSY) are all mathematical formulations that have a place on our grid. Base-2 is the simplest grid. Mathematical realities are precursors of physical realities. These and many other disciplines need the first 64 notations out of the 202 that outline the universe and redefine space-time and infinity. A simple function like cubic-close packing of equal spheres can take its place as a most-simple, key function of our universe. Why not?
Big bang cosmology lacks continuity. First, it’s too hot. Problematically, it tries to cool things off too quickly. Then, it runs out of energy. And, it fishtails with inflationary excuses.
It is, however, very difficult to imagine that one primordial sphere is generated for every unit of an infinitesimal primordial length. That’s a tall order, but it is logically coherent. The net-net is the generation of a phantasmagorical number of infinitesimal primordial spheres per second. Every second something on the order of the area defined by the path of the International Space Station is created (seemingly out of nothing). Within a year, an area about the size of our solar system is created.
An infinitesimal sphere defined by dimensionless constants has a metaphorical equivalent in every level of science and within each notation. The universe would appear to be constantly testing, changing, and evolving to be more efficient or “more integrated”. It is not difficult to imagine. Stephon Alexander’s group, The Autodidactic Universe, is working on it.
So, again, our essential challenge is to re-engage our understanding of the nature of infinity and to give it some breathing room without all the poetry and mythopoetics.
Our model sometimes called the Quiet Expansion, is a mathematical — both numerical and geometrical– model of the universe and it is entirely predictive.
[3a] Scholars like Neil Turok make similar claims. I thought for sure that Neil Turok and his colleagues, Feldbrugge and Lehners, would quickly embrace our model. They did not. One of their claims is that the universe acts like it is constantly starting. Within big bang cosmology, such a claim is counter-intuitive. Within a cold-start model, it at least has a chance to work. They reached their conclusions from a totally different path. Our first note to them was back in 2016, but they have had nothing to say to us. I think if they could point to something that was wrong, one of them would have said as much. At times scholars can be a rather close-knit group.
[3b] Scale Invariant Sphere Dynamics. From the infinitesimal sphere to the movement of galaxies, pi and phi (circles and Fibonacci sequences), are fundamental dynamics within everything. Pi crosses notations; phi builds within a given notation. This model not only uses numbers and geometries, it uses pi, phi, prime numbers, values, and more where big bang cosmology is based on singularities that do not account for dimensionless constants like pi. The mathematics of materialism generally disregards other systems of engagement. How is it that pi is scale invariant? What are the deep dynamics of spheres? We are trying to learn… we are in the earliest stages of our studies of the Fourier transforms and integral transforms. Of course, we’d welcome any and all help to understand these disciplines as well as Steven Strogatz.
[4] Scientific truth. The influence of Tegmark, Arkani-Hamed, and Turok on our thinking is substantial. Until we are able to grasp a better definition of space, time and infinity, all scientific truth is relative or incomplete. It is clear that the concepts of continuity-symmetry-harmony have an “extra” scientific truth. Being first derived from dimensionless constants that are not finite, these qualities beg the questions about the very nature of infinity. It may well be true that we have built up the concept over the centuries. Perhaps all that it is are these three basic concepts. Why not?
[5] Perfection. The concept of perfection was increasing minimized as quantum theory developed. All the greats of physics were involved. Starting with Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, and Max Born, concepts like the uncertainty principle, indeterminacy, and quantum entanglement were increasingly mathematically formulated and began dominating scientific thought. Only in 2001 did Planck’s base units receive the kind of scrutiny that would cause them to be lifted up and examined. It wasn’t until December 2011 that we did our little geometric progression back to his base units. It wasn’t until 2015 did we begin examining the numbers assuming that the first instance was an infinitesimal sphere and that pi defined three facets of perfection within the sphere. And because those spheres are the footings and foundations of each base-2 notation, the concept of perfection and a place for perfection was re-introduced within a very limited framework.
[6] Imperfection. In 2011 in those high school geometry classes, we made models of the five-tetrahedral star, the icosahedron and the Pentakis dodecahedron; we called it squishy geometry. The pieces do not perfectly fit together. There are natural gaps. Aristotle made a mistake that was reinforced by academic thinking for over 1800 years. Even after the mistake was discovered in the 15th century, it had to be rediscover in 1926 and then again in 2010 and still there has been no general debate about the significance of five-tetrahedral star and its gap. Here is one profound imperfection built into the very geometries of the universe and it is largely ignored. Here is one critical gap and a place for quantum physics. There are possibly several other equally important places that will be discussed in future homepages. This is a topic of ongoing analysis.
[7] Transformations. Within the panoply of “big bang” cosmologies, the Fourier transform is ignored. Pi and the simplest geometries are as well. If we are to create a working theory, it seems that it should start simple and begin building as best we can using simple concepts. In our model of the universe, the most basic tools of mathematics and science are, by design, all used progressively, building off of one another. In this model there is a place for Langlands programs. There is a place for point-free geometries. There is a more fundamental place for binary functions, scalar field theory and Lagrangian field theory. It is all a bit much for high school people, yet our intuitions help to guide us.
Stephon Alexander: The Autodidactic Universe (PDF), 2021: The universe learns its own laws by exploring a landscape of possible laws (a class of matrix models) and constantly evolves. Stephon Alexander has his six co-authors. Their work has parallels with the elemental principles of our model: 1) each notation builds on the prior, 2) all notations are always active, 3) there is a dynamic, never-ending relation between the finite and infinite, 3) the facets of pi help us to understand a perfection within the finite which is the perfection of the infinite which is continuity-symmetry-harmony, and 4) continuity-symmetry-harmony are facets of the infinite creating, the order, relations and dynamics within the most infinitesimal spheres.
Ard A. Louis: Generalization bounds for deep learning, Guillermo Valle-Pérez, Ard A. Louis, arXiv:2012.04115v2, December 2020 With some caution, it seems that our theory complies with the requirements for a theory for deep learning, i.e. such a theory would readily scale with data complexity. In our theory we eventually scale to include everything everywhere for all time. We’ve become a de facto school to capture the differences between the architectures within the first 64 notations. It is entirely computable on the surface and we are confident it will accommodate the differences between any and all optimization algorithms. We had been familiar with prior work by Ard Louis and from this December 2020 ArXiv article we will now turn to others within the deep learning space.
Thanu Padmanabhan: Planck length: Lost + found, Thanu Padmanabhan, Elsevier, Science Direct, Physics Letters B, Volume 809, 10 October 2020. Thanu Padmanabhan has been focused on the Planck scale as long as anybody living today. It is a domain of the mind. It cannot be reached by anything other than logic and mathematics. One might think that at such an infinitesimal scale, there is an absolute convergence of time, space, matter and energy. It all becomes a singularity. It is a viewpoint now echoed throughout the scholarly world. For me, it begs the question, “What are Planck’s four base unit calculations? Shall we ignore them?” I don’t think so. Padmanabhan tells us that a “relativistic point particle is a zero dimensional object.” I am not so confident. Even though these calculations look like a “point” particle, all the dynamics of the dimensionless constants that define those units are theoretically scale invariant; those characteristics or qualities do not go away. The classically-schooled scholars still think in terms of the qualities of particles and waves when those calculations are quite obviously much smaller than any wave or particle measurement. We can only know that these physical things exist mathematically. As high school people we found that there are no less than 64 base-2 steps to get into the most infinitesimal Planck scale state. It would seem that each step defines a very unique reality. More to come regarding his comments about the (Feynman) propagator and his 1988 examination of the conceptual framework for blackholes.
Claudia de Rham: Although much of Claudia de Rham’s work is co-authored with others and they use specialized language within very unique conceptual settings, her videos and interviews tend to be more general and generally more self-aware and critical of their collective progress. She is her own best critic and has a delightful sense of humor, so as we go forward, we’ll try to weave a path between her public expressions and her very challenging research. So, yes, there’s more to come.
Nima Arkani-Hamed. He may forever be known by his lecture in Cornell on October 6, 2010 and for his statement, “Spacetime is domed.” It provoked lots of discussion. I say that a key to a transformative concept of spacetime is to establish its boundaries, then its boundary conditions. We have a symbolic or metaphorical start with Planck’s units. If we accept as a given that the calculations for the age of the universe are close enough, we have a range. If we apply a mathematical construct, Euler’s base-2, we have a process. It is simple and builds on prior work: period doubling bifurcation, Feigenbaum’s constant, Poincaré… The 202 notations become functional. The first second comes out within Notation-143. The first light year is within Notation-169. The first billion years emerges toward the end of Notation-198. Every notation builds of the priors. All time is active. All space-and-time share that emergence and thus spacetime is being redefined. There’s an alternative.
Emma Haruka Iwao: The Endless Number. It took a single-minded dedication for Emma Haruka Iwao to singlehandedly introduce the world to the largest possible number in all of creation. From her early childhood she has had a fascination with pi. She may not be Archimedes, yet her work runs circles around him. She has pulled pi out of the finite. And, we proclaim that it is the bridge between the finite and infinite. We further claim that the facets of pi — continuity-symmetry-harmony — are the very definition of the infinite. That’s it. Stop there. We do not need the millions of books about infinity and the infinite. Pi gives us the infinite in a nutshell and Emma Iwao pushes our nose right into it. Here is where we should begin our theories about the start of the universe!
Mansoora Shamim’s Hypothesized, Reified, Hypostasized Numbers: I was stopped short with the work of Mansoora Shamim at CERN labs. On her way to her PhD she did seminal work at University of Oregon and Kansas State University. She didn’t name the squark or gluino, but she helped to keep these two mathematically-defined concepts alive.
You’ll find squarks and gluinos in the pages of the Standard Model of Particle Physics but both remain illusive. Why? Could it be that all the mathematics that define these hypothesized particles are just “too infinitesimal” for the Large Hadron Collider? Dr. Mansoora Shamim just might be able to tell us so. She may be the one who opens a path to Notation-64.
A Dynamical Theory for Massive Supergravity, S. James Sylvester, 2013 In 1971, about when theories about supersymmetries began to emerge, S. James Gates was at MIT. His 1977 PhD thesis was the first at MIT that studied supersymmetries. He has written over 157 papers and several books about it. SUPERSPACE or One thousand and one lessons in supersymmetry, 1983, written with two colleagues, was his first book about it all; the index begins on page 542. At no time did they stop to ask about dimensionless constants, or the role of pi and the Planck numbers. A little like Johnny Lee’s song, Looking for love in all the wrong places, they did not know that there are continuity and symmetry equations that extend well below all possible measurements of space and time. Though infinitesimal and beyond our measurements, the mathematics is still there.
Opening the Pandora’s box at the core of black holes, Raúl Carballo-Rubio (Corresponding author), Francesco Di Filippo, Stefano Liberati, Matt Visser, 2019
2. Email to Robert Laughlin: “Deep inside the tetrahedron (and its octahedron within), this dynamic GIF (Graphics Interchange Format) showed us how both were derived from spheres (cubic-close packing or sphere-stacking in action). When we started to follow pi back to its source, continuity-symmetry-harmony were deep within. Acknowledging a symbolic starting point (defined by some analogue to the Planck Length and Planck time), space and time became derivative, finite, and quantized. When Newton’s absolutes are tamped down, a dynamic finite-infinite relation opens up. Here, pi, as the key dimensionless constant, is quantitative in practice while her infinite expression is qualitative. We had a start of the universe with a single, infinitesimal sphere, Lemaitre’s 1927 long-sought-for primeval atom.
3. Email to scholarly collaborators with the scholars mentioned above: Guillermo Valle Perez (June 22).
4. Google+: Get free of little worldviews. Get the entire universe. Get access to a simple logic. Pi holds clues that opens it all up. Pi is continuity, symmetry and harmony. Continuity-symmetry-harmony is a bridge between the finite and infinite. Learn more here.
5. WordPress: This work and website is to break the impasse created by infinitely-hot big bang theories (versus a cold start — https://81018.com/start/) and by misleading concepts of space and time (https://81018.com/duped/#Newton) and by a failure of Aristotle in basic geometry, a mistake that was repeated for over 1800 years (https://81018.com/duped/#Aristotle). As a result of this effort, we anticipate there could be a profound intellectual awakening and possibly a resurgence of ethics. -Bruce
A complete left turn, I just sent Reed Hasting (co-CEO of Netflix) a note to congratulate him for his past ten years of hard-fought successes. Yet here, I recommend that he incorporate an integrated view of the universe in all that he does.
Magdalena Skipper writes, “Confronting gender bias in Nature’s journalism – at Nature, we know we need to continue to work hard to eliminate gender & other biases.” To which I sent the following Tweet.
@Magda_Skipper No surprise. So going forward, empowering all people is the name of the game. To do it, we’ll all need to break through our limited worldviews so we totally engage the universe, everything, everywhere for all time: http://81018.com No surprise indeed!
Simon Ainslie, NEOM “The thrust for perfection is built into the very fabric of the universe. Continuity-symmetry-harmony, the essence of the circle and sphere, are infinite qualities that are the foundations of the finite, the first moment. To open a way to a sustainable future, build on these three universals defined by the oldest equation in our common history, pi. http://81018.com is a small start on a model of the universe that uses such logic, mathematics, and physics. Until we break through our limited worldviews, our ethics and values will also be limited. Thank you. -Bruce
In 1980 in Paris at the Institut Henri Poincaré, one day I would be in discussions with Jean-Pierre Vigier and the next day with Olivier Costa de Beauregard. We focused on the EPR Paradox and Bell’s inequality equations. By the time I returned to Boston University later that year, I thought, “Nobody has an answer. You could spend your life spinning in circles.” I collected my books at BU and continued walking. I went back to a business that I had started ten years earlier. Little did I know that by helping out in a high school geometry class (December 2011), all these issues would be reopened. It would take me at least five years to get reoriented to learn what today’s scholars were saying. They’ve made some progress. Many new concepts have been introduced. But unanswered is the question, “How does it all cohere?” Solutions to key issues were still outstanding. I do not have that much more time in my life so I have asked quite a few scholars, “What’s wrong with this picture?” Those 202 base-2 notations, “Is it a framework, an outline within which to work, or not?” I believe it is. -BEC
We would celebrate if you could take time to answer the questions of either survey! Copy the questions to an email and send them in with your answers and comments!
Background: In a 2015 article, The Standard Model of particle physics, the image just above first appeared in the magazine, Symmetry (July 21, 2015). It was authored by Kurt Riesselmann of Fermilab. It is an interesting study. Of course, a most important part of the model is the pervasive supersymmetries that are anticipated. That opens unusual pathways to a growing number of hypothetical particles.
Abstract. Things start simple. Our base-2 outline of the universe starts with the first instance of space-and-time. For now, Max Planck’s base units are taken-as-given and assumed to manifest as a primordial sphere, defined in part by key dimensionless constants which are all used to calculate Max’s historic results. These units also define a rate of expansion (assuming one primordial sphere per Planck unit of time). The role of pi, a dynamic bridging of the finite-infinite, as well as basic geometries and quantum fluctuations are explored. Issues within big bang theories are also explored.
I invite you to explore an alternative model for the emergence of our universe. -BEC
1. With numbers we grasp continuities, order, and time.
Numbers define: Assumed are primordial numbers like those calculated by Max Planck (1899) and by George Stoney (1874). Today’s scholars like John Ralston (University of Kansas) advocate for new calculations based on current knowledge, yet Planck’s base units, taken as given, open a conceptual model for the initial conditions, parameters, and boundaries of our universe. Planck’s numbers will be tweaked. His calculations are based on dimensionless constants. Natural units have a special status and give us a metaphorical-yet-clear start of the universe. If the current calculations for the age of the universe are also taken as given, we have a duration and an endpoint we might call, “today’s expansion,” the Now, and even “the current point.”
Between the smallest number and largest number is every possible second and every possible part (infinitesimals) of every second. It is all encapsulated, numbered, and accounted; and, simple boundaries and the largest-possible scale are established. [1]
2. With geometries we grasp symmetries, relations, and space.
Shapes define the look-and-feel of the first instant. Lemaître intuited a primordial atom. Within our emerging theory, it is an infinitesimal primordial sphere defined by dimensionless constants starting with pi (π). Pi reaches beyond the finite and provides our first look at the nature of the infinite. Pi, a key dynamic ratio, is never-ending and never-repeating, always the same and always changing. Everybody knows pi yet it seems that very few know it well.
Geometries work. In 2011 in our high school geometry classes, we chased tetrahedrons and octahedrons, going within, smaller and smaller. From our classroom model to the Planck length there were just 112 base-2 steps by dividing the edges by 2 and connecting the new vertices until we were about the size of the Planck’s length.
Of course, when we multiplied the Planck Length by 2, there were 112 steps back up into the classroom and just 90 more stepsto the edges of the universe. We were more than flummoxed; it was all too simple.
By 2014 our current workingchart of 202 notations began taking shape. We engaged the far-reaching Langlands programs. We studied a bit of string theory and its M-theory. When we finally learned about cubic-close packing (of equal spheres), we began thinking that we just might be onto a different model of the universe. Ours had simple numbers, well-explored and generally-understood concepts, and potentially every possible geometry from the first instant, i.e..the very start of the universe. [2a]
Within the heart of our geometries. Planck’s infinitesimal numbers push us into a very different logic. Here dimensionless constants dominate. And, among all the constants, pi dominates. And, there we identified three facets of pi, continuity, symmetry, and harmony. How could such a dimensionless constant be finite? Is “never-ending and never-repeating” finite?
Intuiting the essence of pi. Quickly we ran into the closed-or-open universe debates. So, we postulate that the universe is finite and infinity is totally other. We postulate that infinity is the source for pi and the other dimensionless constants such that pi reaches between the finite and the infinite. Then, we postulate that pi’s first finite manifestation is a primordial sphere — the first sphere and first thing in the universe.
Imputing boundaries and boundary conditions. Base-2 is a most simple means to sort all the seconds and parts of a second that define our universe. Symbolically and analogically, we’ve used Planck’s numbers from his 1899 calculations to create our working chart of the universe. And yes, the result is the 202 notations to encapsulate the universe — all time, all space, everything, everywhere. Perhaps a little like a DNA sequence, here numbers and shape define it all. [2b]
3. And, within dynamics we grasp continuities-symmetries in motion.
We assume all notations are always active. Each builds on the prior; therefore, only the current notation, 202, has time asymmetry. That key issue is being addressed in several ways, albeit it’s one of our youngest issues among many open issues within this emerging theory. [3a]
The number of notations, of course, is not the key. The concept of a grid from the first moment to this day is. Again, using Planck Time, we go from the first moment to the first second. Out of 202 notations, the first second is within Notation-143. The first light year is within Notation-169. Then, we go 370,000 years (Notation-187) for recombination, to 300 million years (Notation-196) for large-scale structure formation, to the first billion years within Notation-198 to this very time right now (Notation-202). And, yes, these numbers outline aether theories (and that would even include lattice Higgs theories).
The stacking and packing of spheres is a key activity and a natural inflation. By following the progression of Planck Charge and Planck Mass, we find that there is enough temperature for the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP) between Notations 135-and-136. Using Euler’s base-2 exponential notation, from a cold start (very close to absolute zero), the QGP begins within the first second of the start of the universe.[3b]
Natural Inflation: One primordial sphere per primordial unit of length. The thrust for an expanding universe starts with one primordial sphere per unit of primordial time. If the expansion is then calculated for just the first second, using Planck’s base units, PlanckTime generates 539-tredecillion spheres per second. Those numbers are necessarily woven together with Planck Mass, Planck Charge, and the speed of light. If we were to use StoneyTime, it would generate 4605-tredecillion spheres per second.[3c]
4. We assume a necessary, always-active, finite-infinite relation.
Finite-infinite. Many scholars say that infinity is messing up science. Perhaps their concept of infinity is incomplete. Perhaps they do not think about the origins of dimensionless constants. Now, we have a very large number of infinitesimal primordial spheres per second coming from somewhere. If we say “infinity” most scholars will have a problem. Yet, if we say that pi is the concrescence of continuity, symmetry and harmony, and that looks like a sphere, there may be fewer problems. If we say that the qualities of continuity, symmetry and harmony define the infinite, perhaps we should stop and contemplate that.
Think. Reflect. Be gracious… because that is exactly what is being asked of every scholar-scientist-student.
Infinitesimals. Creating a transitional logic, infinitesimals challenge us to begin to grasp the dynamics between the finite and infinite. If on one hand we open the definition of the infinite and on the other we radically limit its scope, we might begin to understand how infinitesimals relate to strange things like blackholes, singularities, multiverses, and all our hypothetical particles proposed over the years.
Science is the continuity and symmetry that start within the sphere. And, science is also the harmony that is found deep within the sphere’s Fourier Transform. Continuity has simple values: order… memory. Symmetry has more complex values: relations… balance. And harmony has the most complex values: continuities-and-symmetries in motion. It is life, consciousness, and perhaps all our other values, even hope and love.
Infinity is continuity, symmetry and harmony, nothing more and nothing less. Categorically, that’s it for now.
5. We assume domains of perfection...
Facing quantum fluctuations. In light of the 202 notations, the focus is first between Notation-64 and Notation-67, a range within which current research detects fluctuations. It begs the question about what is happening between Notations 1-and-64. If cubic-close packing is generating basic geometries within densities that are on the order of neutron stars (based on Planck’s numbers), one can imagine that only the most efficient combinations of points, lines and geometries manifest. There is a thrust of simple perfections; yet, there are also many more factors to analyze that could interrupt a flow of the geometries of a simple perfection. [5]
6. We all know there are domains of imperfection.
Indeterminacy and quantum fluctuations are inherent in our universe. Yet, many people are unaware of the gap created by five tetrahedrons sharing a common edge and how within the infinitesimal scale it opens the way to fluctuations. If systems begin to manifest around Notation-50, there could be many notations where indeterminacy prevails but is too infinitesimal to be measured..[6]
7. A place on this grid for the consciousness-values-and-The Mind
Further considering the continuity, symmetry and harmony within pi. Throughout our brief history as a civilization, the wise among us have said something like, “Truth sets you free.” Surely the best of science has empowered us. The best of science has liberated the human mind. Yet, freedom is a value-laden word. What is continuity? What is symmetry? What is harmony? Are all three necessarily what defines both the first sphere and the concept of freedom?
Pi, spheres, infinitesimals and notations are well-known parameters within science yet apparently at no time have these three been applied to the first instance of the universe. Also, the progression, Notations 1-to-64, has not been formally engaged within academia. Within one of our early charts, we made groups of ten notations and postulated (guessed, imagined, hypostatized) the following: 1. Forms (like Langlands programs/automorphic forms) develop in the first ten notations, 2-11. 2. Archetypal Structures develop in the next ten, from Notations 11-20. 3. Archetypal Substances develop in the next ten, Notations 21-30.
4. From Notations 31-40, Archetypal Qualities are given a place along the grid. 5. And from Notations 41-to-50, Archetypal Relations are postulated. 6. From those five groups, Archetypal Systems are then postulated (Notations 51-60). Here within these notations was the beginning of systems theory, the Mind, consciousness and values. It is all physical. Yet, the physical systems measured by our most sensitive devices like the Large Hadron Collider can only measure effects from around Notation-65 and larger.
The first 64 notations. We will continue to explore how these infinitesimal spheres manifest the Fourier transforms and all other integral transforms. These dynamics are so rich, surely here are the very keys for electromagnetism-and-gravity and the yoke that ties them together. [7]
Our history is so short, so minuscule, and we’re on a step learning curve. And, describing this infinitesimal universe has been problematic. Now, we are not scholars, certainly not a cosmologist nor astrophysicist. We are high school people, but that has not stopped us from discovering Tim N. Palmer of Oxford and his work with Invariant Set Theory, or Simon White of the International Max Planck Research School on Astrophysics in Munich who is developing a Cold Dark Matter paradigm, or Alain Connes (and company) regarding their Spectral Standard Model.
Where pi has continuity from the first moment of time to the current time, phi (φ) has a very different ordering principle that appears to be limited by notation. There may be other kinds of fluctuations where these two ordering principles seat together. It is ideation that is currently being explored.
Many brilliant scholars have been working on these problems from quite a different perspective. None have acknowledged the simple outline created by the 202 base-2 notations. To say the least, our first 64 notations are enigmatic. Although infinitesimal, Notations-65-to-67 are on the edge of our measuring capabilities of our finest instruments (i.e. the LHC, CERN, Geneva).
We recognize how idiosyncratic such statements are. For many our work would naturally be characterized as crackpottery. Yet, this is just our beginning. If we take the base units as defined by Planck or Stoney, densities are in the range of neutron stars and blackholes. It is a very different picture of our expanding universe. Yet, the enigmatic and idiosyncratic may be necessary to open new paradigms of who we are and why.
Concepts and ideas. On my path, I have met a few of our finest living scholars. All struggle. It’s never easy even though a few make it look easy. Many of us do not have the finesse of others and our work is written off too quickly. There are so many ways to interpret a data set like the chart of 202 notations. When the data doesn’t cohere or leaves questions unanswered, theories provide temporary work-arounds. Our theory has been known by many names. Big Board-little universe captured the sense that space and time are disintermediated and the two need to be redefined. Quiet Expansion was our simple way to distance ourselves from the Big Bang. Yet, our most descriptive was the “Mathematically-Integrated View of the Universe.” This model, to my knowledge, is the only one that outlines the universe with mathematics — both numbers and geometries — with causal efficacy from the first instance to this very moment. There are thirty presuppositions. If, in some manner, these are engaged, we believe there could be a profound intellectual awakening and possibly a resurgence of ethics. -BEC
[1] Numbers, Boundaries & Parameters. First, we have a start time around 13.8 billion years ago. Then we have our current time. Just like DNA, every moment has its own unique identify within the universe. Every instant using base-2 notation is part of key continuity equations. Like the 31 trillion digits of pi (31,415,926,535,897) (See the work of Emma Iwao) that are never-ending and never-repeating (always changing and always the same), here is the heart of our horizontally-scrolled chart of the universe. Of course, the first continuity equation is Planck Time to the current time. Planck Length to the size of the universe is next. Then, Planck Mass to the total mass of the universe and Planck Charge to the total charge in the universe follows. A bit much, the veracity of such a concept is questioned and explored throughout this website.
Keep questioning everything. We get bored and dull if we don’t. For many years (and within some quarters, even today) if you questioned the big bang, you’d be laughed out of the room. Part of our problem is our arrogance that cuts off intellectual discussion. For example, many scholars are sure that science is value neutral. That’s just a bit of silliness. Its deepest definitions exude value and values. Eventually we’ll realize that we have adopted old constructs that impede our thinking and our sciences. Here are what may be considered the biggest three: • Hawking’s infinitely-hot big-bang start holds us back. It blocks a cold start. • Newton’s cosmology of absolute time and space suffocates us. It blocks the current point. • Aristotle’s failures with geometry truncate creativity, blocks our grasp of indeterminacy and creativity, and diminishes geometry in general. This story is one of the deep failures of scholarship.
Current work: Fine Structure Constant and Pi. Scholars have been challenged and mystified by these two physical constants. They should be. Inherent in both are starting points for the universe. I am now working through the scholarship of Jeff Yee, author of The Relationship of the Fine Structure Constant and Pi (June 2019) and of Giuseppe Dattoli, the author of The fine structure constant and numerical alchemy, 2010. Yee has clearly stated, “…the fine structure constant is derived from a geometric ratio of surface areas, as a result of vibrations in a lattice with a body-centered cubic arrangement.” Then later, “The fine structure constant can be derived in terms of pi due to a ratio of geometric shapes, possibly the result of the motion of something that fills empty space.” He’s on it!
Written within my mind’s eye, “We should not underestimate the place, position, and power of pi!” We still have many open questions within number theory.
[2a] Geometries have been making a comeback. Topology, shape theory, representation theory, category theory, Langlands programs, string theory (M-theory) and supersymmetries (SUSY) are all mathematical formulations that have a place on our grid. Base-2 is the simplest grid. Mathematical realities are precursors of physical realities. These (and many other) disciplines need the first 64 notations out of the 202 that outline the universe and redefine space-time and infinity. A simple function like cubic-close packing of equal spheres can take its place as a most-simple, key function of our universe. Why not?
Big bang cosmology lacks continuity. First, it’s too hot. Problematically, it tries to cool things down too quickly. Then, it runs out of energy. And, it fishtails with inflationary excuses.
An infinitesimal sphere defined by dimensionless constants has a metaphorical equivalent in every level of science and within each notation. The universe would appear to be constantly testing, changing, and evolving to be more efficient or “more integrated.” It is not difficult to imagine. Stephon Alexander’s group, The Autodidactic Universe, is working on it.
It is, however, very difficult to imagine that one primordial sphere is generated for every unit of an infinitesimal primordial length. That’s a tall order, but it is logically coherent. The net-net is the generation of a phantasmagorical number of infinitesimal primordial spheres per second. Every second something on the order of the area defined by the path of the International Space Station is manifest (seemingly out of nothing). Within a year, an area about the size of our solar system is created.
So, again, our essential challenge is to re-engage our understanding of the nature of infinity and to give it some breathing room without all the poetry and mythopoetics.
Our model sometimes called the Quiet Expansion, is a mathematical — both numerical and geometrical– model of the universe and it is entirely predictive. Just silliness? Please let us know: 12-question survey for this article.
[3a] Scholars like Neil Turok make similar claims. I thought for sure that Neil Turok and his colleagues, Feldbrugge and Lehners, would quickly embrace our model. They did not. One of their claims is that the universe acts like it is constantly starting. Within big bang cosmology, such a claim is counter-intuitive. Within a cold-start model, it at least has a chance to work. They reached their conclusions from a totally different path. Our first note to them was back in 2016, but they have had nothing to say to us. I think if they could point to something that was wrong, one of them would have said as much. Also, it is natural that close-knit groups evolve with specialized language and concepts which those outside their group do not fully understand.
“New Physics Beyond the Standard Model“ (Wikipedia). Stymied for so long, Beyond the Standard Model has its own acronym now, BSM. It has become its own special category of study. And, it should be. We’ve all got to push the edges of our understanding of things. These studies are all too important to be left in the hands a few elite scholars. Among those who cannot yet imagine a new physics based on infinitesimal spheres that are defined by the Planck scale, an excellent read is John Ellis‘ May 2021 ArXiv article from the Andromeda Proceedings (BSM-2021 Conference, Zewail City, Egypt), SMEFT Constraints on New Physics Beyond the Standard Model (PDF). The Center for Fundamental Physics (CFP). In collaboration with the Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences at Sabancı University, this online international conference was titled, “Beyond Standard Model: From Theory to Experiment (BSM-2021)” and it ran from March 29-April 2, 2021. It seems to me that a conceptual stumbling block goes back to the general acceptance of the concept that the infinite is nowhere found within the finite (Hilbert). Of course, we start with pi. Is it finite or infinite? We observe the continuity of its never-ending, always the same, forever-changing numbers. …finite or infinite? We observe its perfect symmetry. Is it finite or infinite? Now, how about the sphere’s inherent Fourier transforms? Are those harmonic functions finite or infinite? Both? A dynamic bridge between the two?
[3b] Scale Invariant Sphere Dynamics. From the infinitesimal sphere to the movement of galaxies, pi and phi (circles and Fibonacci sequences), are fundamental dynamics within everything. Pi crosses notations; phi builds within a given notation. This model not only uses numbers and geometries, it uses pi, phi, prime numbers, values, and more where big bang cosmology is based on singularities that do not account for dimensionless constants like pi. The mathematics of materialism generally disregards other systems of engagement. How is it that pi is scale invariant? What are the deep dynamics of spheres? We are trying to learn… we are in the earliest stages of our studies of the Fourier transforms and integral transforms. Of course, we’d welcome any-and-all help to understand these disciplines as well as Steven Strogatz.
[3c] Expanding Universe. This model of the universe has a very natural inflation. It is naive on the surface — one primordial sphere per primordial unit of length and time — the result is bewildering. How can we begin to imagine what 539-tredecillion spheres per second means? If necessarily woven together with Planck Mass, Planck Charge, and the speed of light, it is a radically different model of who we are and why. That finite-infinite relation becomes penultimate.
[4] Scientific truth. The influence of Tegmark, Arkani-Hamed, and Turok on our thinking is substantial. Until we are able to grasp a better definition of space, time and infinity, all scientific truth is relative or incomplete. Continuity-symmetry-harmony have an “extra” scientific truth. Derived from dimensionless constants that are not finite, these qualities beg the questions about the very nature of infinity. Over the centuries, scholars and religionists have built up the concept of infinity. Perhaps all that we can definitively know are the three basic concepts. Why not?
[5] Perfection. The concept of perfection was increasingly minimized as quantum theory developed. All the greats of physics were involved. Starting with Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, and Max Born, concepts like the uncertainty principle, indeterminacy, and quantum entanglement were increasingly mathematically formulated and began dominating scientific thought. In 2001 Frank Wilczek scrutinized Planck’s base units and caused them to be lifted up and re-examined. It wasn’t until December 2011 that we did our little geometric progression backing into Planck’s base units. Not until 2015 did we begin examining the numbers assuming that the first instance was an infinitesimal sphere and that pi defined three facets of perfection within the sphere. And because those spheres are the footings and foundations of each base-2 notation, the concept of perfection and a place for perfection has been re-introduced within a very different framework: •Foundations Within Foundations: https://81018.com/foundations/ •Perfections of Pi: https://81018.com/perfection/ •The Start: https://81018.com/starts-8/ •Center for Perfection Studies: https://81018.com/center/
[6] Imperfection. In 2011 in those high school geometry classes, we made models of the five-tetrahedral star, the icosahedron and the Pentakis dodecahedron; we called it squishy geometry. The pieces do not perfectly fit together. There are natural gaps. Aristotle made a mistake that was reinforced by academic thinking for over 1800 years. Even after the mistake was discovered in the 15th century, it had to be rediscovered in 1926 and then again in 2010; and still, there has been no general debate about the significance of five-tetrahedral star and its gap. Here is one profound imperfection built into the very geometries of the universe and it is largely ignored. Here is one critical gap and a place for quantum physics. There are possibly several other equally important places that will be discussed in future homepages. This is a topic of ongoing analysis.
[7] Transformations. Within the panoply of “big bang” cosmologies, the Fourier transform is ignored. Pi and the simplest geometries are as well. If we are to create a working theory, it seems that it should start simple and begin building as best we can using simple concepts. In our model of the universe, the most basic tools of mathematics and science are, by design, all used progressively, building off of one another. In this model there is a place for Langlands programs. There is a place for point-free geometries. There is a more fundamental place for binary functions, scalar field theory and Lagrangian field theory. It is all a bit much for high school people, yet our intuitions help to guide us.
These eight scholars have inspired us. This website is an open dialogue with leading scholars, scientists, and students who think about things like space, time and infinity. These eight scholars are well-known to the people who frequent this website. Each has a reference page to their work, especially as it applies to introducing a new model for the start and growth of our universe. With all the brilliance within academia over the years, it is inexplicable that our base-2 model originated within a high school geometry class. In 2011 we were just following the path down inside a tetrahedron and octahedron to the Planck base units. It was that simple. Today, we will document those efforts by scholars who are beginning to use analogous constructs._
Stephon Alexander: The Autodidactic Universe (PDF), 2021: The universe learns its own laws by exploring a landscape of possible laws (a class of matrix models) and constantly evolves. Stephon Alexander has his six co-authors. Their work has a few parallels with the elemental principles of our model: 1) each notation builds on the prior, 2) all notations are always active, 3) there is a dynamic, never-ending relation between the finite and infinite, 4) the facets of pi help us to understand a perfection within the finite which is the perfection of the infinite which is continuity-symmetry-harmony, and 5) continuity-symmetry-harmony are facets of the infinite creating, the order, relations and dynamics within the most infinitesimal spheres.
Ard A. Louis: Generalization bounds for deep learning, Guillermo Valle-Pérez, Ard A. Louis, arXiv:2012.04115v2, December 2020 With some caution, it seems that our theory complies with the requirements for a theory for deep learning, i.e. such a theory would readily scale with data complexity. In our theory we eventually scale to include everything everywhere for all time. We’ve become a de facto school to capture the differences between the architectures within the first 64 notations. It is entirely computable on the surface and we are confident it will accommodate the differences between any and all optimization algorithms. We had been familiar with prior work by Ard Louis and from his December 2020 ArXiv article (linked above); we will now turn to others within the deep learning space.
Thanu Padmanabhan: Planck length: Lost + found, Thanu Padmanabhan, Elsevier, Science Direct, Physics Letters B, Volume 809, 10 October 2020. Thanu Padmanabhan has been focused on the Planck scale as long as anybody living today. It is a domain of the mind. It cannot be reached by anything other than logic and mathematics. One might think that at such an infinitesimal scale, there is an absolute convergence of time, space, matter and energy. It all becomes a singularity. It is a viewpoint now echoed throughout the scholarly world. For me, it begs the question, “What are Planck’s four base unit calculations? Shall we ignore them?” I don’t think so. Padmanabhan tells us that a “relativistic point particle is a zero dimensional object.” I am not so confident. Even though these calculations look like a “point” particle, all the dynamics of the dimensionless constants that define those units are theoretically scale invariant; those characteristics or qualities do not go away. The classically-schooled scholars still think in terms of the qualities of particles and waves when those calculations are quite obviously much smaller than any wave or particle measurement. We can only know that these physical things exist mathematically. As high school people we found that there are no less than 64 base-2 steps to get into the most infinitesimal Planck scale state. It would seem that each step defines a very unique reality. There’ll be more to come regarding his comments about the (Feynman) propagator and his 1988 examination of the conceptual framework for blackholes.
Claudia de Rham: Although much of Claudia de Rham’s work is co-authored with others and they use specialized language within the very unique conceptual settings of astrophysics, her videos and interviews tend to be more general and generally more self-aware and critical of their collective progress. She is her own best critic and has a delightful sense of humor, so as we go forward, we’ll try to weave a path between her public expressions and her very challenging research. So, yes, here there’s more to come as well.
Nima Arkani-Hamed. He may forever be known by his lecture in Cornell on October 6, 2010 and for his statement, “Spacetime is domed.” It provoked lots of discussion. I say that a key to a transformative concept of spacetime is to establish its boundaries, then its boundary conditions. We have a symbolic or metaphorical start with Planck’s units. If we accept as a given that the calculations for the age of the universe are close enough, we have a range. If we apply a mathematical construct, Euler’s base-2, we have a process. It is simple and builds on prior work: period doubling bifurcation, Feigenbaum’s constant, Poincaré… The 202 notations become functional. The first second comes out within Notation-143. The first light year is within Notation-169. The first billion years emerges toward the end of Notation-198. Every notation builds of the priors. All time is active. All space-and-time share that emergence and thus spacetime is being redefined. There’s an alternative.
Emma Haruka Iwao: The Endless Number. It took the single-minded dedication of Emma Haruka Iwao to singlehandedly introduce the world to the largest possible number in all of creation. From her early childhood she has had a fascination with pi. She may not be Archimedes, yet her work runs circles around him. She has pulled pi out of the finite. And, we proclaim that it is the bridge between the finite and infinite. We further claim that the facets of pi — continuity-symmetry-harmony — are the very definition of the infinite. That’s it. Stop there. Science does not need the millions of books about infinity and the infinite. Pi gives us the infinite in a nutshell and Emma Iwao pushes our nose right into it. Here is where we should begin our theories about the start of the universe!
Mansoora Shamim’s Hypothesized, Reified, Hypostasized Numbers: I was stopped short with the work of Mansoora Shamim at CERN labs. On her way to her PhD she did seminal work at University of Oregon and Kansas State University. She didn’t name the squark or gluino, but she helped to keep these two mathematically-defined concepts alive.
You’ll find squarks and gluinos in the pages of the Standard Model of Particle Physics but both remain illusive. Why? Could it be that all the mathematics that define these hypothesized particles are just “too infinitesimal” for the Large Hadron Collider? Dr. Mansoora Shamim just might be able to tell us so. She may be the one who opens a path to, and down smaller through, Notation-64. Please do a word search of this website on her first name, Mansoora.
Robert Laughlin, Stanford, A Different Universe, Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down, 2005 On page 120 he says, “The word “ether” has extremely negative connotations with theoretical physicists because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it is rather nicely captures the way most physicists today actually think about the vacuum.”
A Dynamical Theory for Massive Supergravity, S. James Sylvester, 2013 In 1971, about when theories about supersymmetries began to emerge, S. James Gates was at MIT. His 1977 PhD thesis was the first at MIT that studied supersymmetries. He has written over 157 papers and several books about it. SUPERSPACE or One thousand and one lessons in supersymmetry, 1983, written with three colleagues, was his first book about it all; the index begins on page 542. At no time did they stop to ask about dimensionless constants, or the role of pi and the Planck numbers. A little like Johnny Lee’s song, Looking for love in all the wrong places, they did not know that there are continuity and symmetry equations that extend well below all possible measurements of space and time. Though infinitesimal and beyond our measurements, the mathematics is still there.
Footnote: There are many other related pages currently being developed. Most have a security wall requiring a password because these pages are still early-stage developments. If you are interested in helping to develop this model, please request the URL and passwords to join this effort
2. Email to Robert Laughlin: “It may be a very different universe.” Deep inside the tetrahedron (and its octahedron within), this dynamic GIF showed us how both were derived from spheres (cubic-close packing and sphere-stacking). When we started to follow pi back to its source, continuity-symmetry-harmony were deep within. Acknowledging a symbolic starting point (defined by some analogue to the Planck Length and Planck time), space and time became derivative, finite, and quantized. When Newton’s absolutes are tamped down, a dynamic finite-infinite relation opens up. Here, pi, as the key dimensionless constant, is quantitative in practice while her infinite expression is qualitative. We had a start of the universe with a single, infinitesimal sphere, Lemaitre’s 1927 long-sought-for primeval atom.
3. Emails while hammering on the homepage: Inspirations come from many places. First, there are all the many collaborators and co-authors mentioned within our scholars’ published works, plus there are journalists and world leaders who cause us to write. For example, Guillermo Valle Perez is a co-author with Ard Louis. Then, I receive an email soliciting money for the Obama Library. A special listing of a range of people will evolve as each are sent emails about how our work is related to their work.
5. WordPress: The purpose of this work and website is to break the impasse created by infinitely-hot big bang theories (versus a cold start — https://81018.com/start/) and by misleading concepts of space and time (https://81018.com/biased/#Newton) and by a failure of Aristotle in basic geometry, a mistake that was repeated for over 1800 years (https://81018.com/biased/#Aristotle). As a result of this effort, wouldn’t it good to have an intellectual awakening around integrative thinking, a resurgence of ethics, and a hypersensitivity about the nature of our walk in this universe. To that end, many.emails are sent to key academic thinkers and leaders throughout the world. -Bruce
A complete left turn, I sent Reed Hasting (co-CEO of Netflix) a note to congratulate him for his past ten years of hard-fought successes. Yet here, I recommend that he incorporate an integrated view of the universe in all that he does.
Magdalena Skipper writes, “Confronting gender bias in Nature’s journalism – at Nature, we know we need to continue to work hard to eliminate gender & other biases.” To which I sent the following Tweet.
@Magda_Skipper No surprise. So going forward, empowering all people is the name of the game. To do it, we’ll all need to break through our limited worldviews so we totally engage the universe, everything, everywhere for all time: http://81018.com No surprise indeed!
Simon Ainslie, NEOM “The thrust for perfection is built into the very fabric of the universe. Continuity-symmetry-harmony, the essence of the circle and sphere, are infinite qualities that are the foundations of the finite, the first moment. To open a way to a sustainable future, build on these three universals defined by the oldest equation in our common history, pi. http://81018.com is a small start on a model of the universe that uses such logic, mathematics, and physics. Until we break through our limited worldviews, our ethics and values will also be limited. Thank you. -Bruce ( A message through Linked IN)
Then there are all the short spontaneous ones like these: @brianmclaren You need an integrated view of the universe… part epiphany, a little MEGO, but a bit of fun: https://81018.com Or, like this: @lsarsour – @CoriBush – @AOC Yes, yes, yes, but we need a new context for this atonement. Our little worldviews are clashing all the time. A step out of that foray is an integrated view of the universe — just 202 simple base-2 notations. Our start on it: http://81018.com It is easy and calming, too!
In 1980 in Paris at the Institut Henri Poincaré, one day I would be in discussions with Jean-Pierre Vigier and the next day with Olivier Costa de Beauregard. They were polar opposites. We focused on the 1935 EPR Paradox and Bell’s inequality equations. By the time I returned to Boston University later that year, I thought, “Nobody has an answer. You could spend your life spinning in circles.” I collected my books at BU and continued walking. I went back to a business that I had started ten years earlier. Little did I know that by helping out in a high school geometry class (December 2011), all these issues would be reopened. It would take me at least five years to get reoriented to learn what today’s scholars were saying. They’ve made some progress. Many new concepts have been introduced. But unanswered is the question, “How does it all cohere?” Solutions to key issues are still outstanding. I do not have that much more time in my life so I have asked quite a few scholars, “What’s wrong with this picture?” referring to our 202 base-2 notations, “Is it a framework, an outline within which to work, or not?” I believe it is. –BEC
We would celebrate if you could take time to answer the questions of either survey! Copy the questions to an email and send them in with your answers and comments!
An unlikely approach to consciousness, sleep,
and basic questions
The finite-infinite relation has been consistently-and-badly abused by people throughout the millennia. The concept of infinity was the key problem so mathematically rigorous “work-arounds“ were developed to avoid it altogether. Back in 1970, I thought infinity could be defined as: (1)_continuity (renders order), (2)_symmetry (renders relations), (3)_harmony (renders dynamics). My studies of scientific anomalies and quantum fluctuations, opened questions about possible transformations between the finite and infinite. My hypothesis was, that if taken together, the three would necessarily define a moment of perfection.
Yet, with no framework, those concepts were just a feel-good, “holiday-collection” of words.
New academic insights are difficult, yet when one begins to grasp these continua, the largest possible for space-time and matter-energy, exploring new possibilities is easier. Continued (entire article)… Caution…a working, first-draft.
We started our base-2 work back in December 2011. A simple mathematical model, it appeared to have been unexplored by the academic community so we began asking some key scholars our key question:
An unlikely approach to consciousness, sleep,
and basic questions
The finite-infinite relation has been consistently-and-badly abused by people throughout the millennia. The concept of infinity was the key problem so mathematically rigorous “work-arounds“ were developed to avoid it altogether. Back in 1970, I thought infinity could be defined as: (1)_continuity (renders order), (2)_symmetry (renders relations), (3)_harmony (renders dynamics). My studies of scientific anomalies and quantum fluctuations, opened questions about possible transformations between the finite and infinite. My hypothesis was, that if taken together, the three would necessarily define a moment of perfection.
Yet, with no framework, those concepts were just a feel-good, “holiday-collection” of words.
New academic insights are difficult, yet when one begins to grasp these continua, the largest possible for space-time and matter-energy, exploring new possibilities is easier. Continued (entire article)… Caution…a working, first-draft.
We started our base-2 work back in December 2011. A simple mathematical model, it appeared to have been unexplored by the academic community so we began asking some key scholars our key question:
“…just simple math and logic but the results are so idiosyncratic. What are we doing wrong?”
Of the scholars who challenge basic assumptions about space and time, Nima Arkani-Hamed, can be difficult to understand yet his work is held in high regard among academics.
An unlikely approach to consciousness, sleep,
and basic questions
The finite-infinite relation has been consistently-and-badly abused by people throughout the millennia. The concept of infinity was the key problem so mathematically rigorous “work-arounds“ were developed to avoid it altogether. Back in 1970, I thought infinity could be defined as: (1)_continuity (renders order), (2)_symmetry (renders relations), (3)_harmony (renders dynamics). My studies of scientific anomalies and quantum fluctuations, opened questions about possible transformations between the finite and infinite. My hypothesis was, that if taken together, the three would necessarily define a moment of perfection.
Yet, with no framework, those concepts were just a feel-good, “holiday-collection” of words.
New academic insights are difficult, yet when one begins to grasp these continua, the largest possible for space-time and matter-energy, exploring new possibilities is easier. Continued (entire article)… Caution…a working, first-draft.
We started our base-2 work back in December 2011. Our model appeared to have been unexplored by the academic community so we began asking some key scholars our key question:
“…just simple math and logic but the results are so idiosyncratic. What are we doing wrong?”
Of the many scholars who challenge basic assumptions about space and time, Nima Arkani-Hamed, can be difficult to understand but he has been among the most persistent!
Jan 9, 202 @lukecombs Great little story, Luke. Thank you. I am chasing a very simple model of the universe that started in a high school geometry class. It has a simple logic and simple math but all the “greats” ignore it. The current story: http://81018.com Back story: https://81018.com/home/
An unlikely approach to consciousness, sleep,
and basic questions
The finite-infinite relation has been consistently-and-badly abused by people throughout the millennia. The concept of infinity was the key problem so mathematically rigorous “work-arounds“ were developed to avoid it altogether. Back in 1970, I thought infinity could be defined as: (1)_continuity (renders order), (2)_symmetry (renders relations), (3)_harmony (renders dynamics). My studies of scientific anomalies and quantum fluctuations, opened questions about possible transformations between the finite and infinite. My hypothesis was, that if taken together, the three would necessarily define a moment of perfection.
Yet, with no framework, those concepts were just a feel-good, “holiday-collection” of words.
New academic insights are difficult, yet when one begins to grasp these continua, the largest possible for space-time and matter-energy, exploring new possibilities is easier. Continued (entire article)… Caution…a working, first-draft.
We started our base-2 work back in December 2011. A simple mathematical model, it appeared to have been unexplored by the academic community so we began asking some key scholars our key question:
“…just simple math and logic but the results are so idiosyncratic. What are we doing wrong?”
Worldviews limit perspective 