Upon discovering the work of Rohan Abeyaratne

TO: Rohan Abeyaratne, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Articles/books: Evolution of phase transitions, May 2006; Evolution of Phase Transitions: a Continuum Theory, co-author J.K. Knowles, Cambridge University Press, 2006; Universal energy transport law for dissipative and diffusive phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 93, 104109; arXiv; CV (ResearchGate); homepage and Wikipedia.

URL for this page: https://81018.com/abeyaratne/

Third email: 18 November 2025

Dear Prof. Dr. Rohan Abeyaratne:

My first contact was in 2019. That email was quiet and now times have changed — the big bang theory is challenged due to observations. We need alternatives. As a thought experiment points or the start of a toy model:

  1. Assume the first manifestation of a thing is a geometrically simple infinitesimal sphere defined by the Planck base units with facets defined by the four primary irrational numbers. See a dynamic illustration.
  2. As a thought exercise, follow the simple stacking-packing-triangulating of spheres beginning at Notation-0.
    • Assume Planck Length is the first instantiation of space while Planck Time is the first moment of time and with the other base units defines thing. 
    • π’s continuity (infinite digits), symmetry, and harmony (Fourier dynamics) bridge the discrete Planck scale to continuous spacetime, avoiding the singularities of the Big Bang.
    • The 202nd notation contains the current time, the Now. Once activated, all notations remain active, building on each other.
  3. The first second of the universe is within Notation 143, the first year within Notation-169, the first 1000 years within Notation 179 (and 189-one million and 199-one billion). 
  4. Assuming one Planck Sphere per unit  of Planck Time-Planck Length, and unit of Planck Mass-Planck Charge, it calculates to be approximately 18.5 tredecillion spheres per second: https://81018.com/tredecillion/
  5. Using those figures, Grok and ChatGPT calculate the Hubble Tension to be 71 km/s/Mpc: https://81018.com/hubble-derivation/
  6. The universe is outlined in 202 notations: https://81018.com/10-notations/
  7. Infinities of the four primary irrational numbers are the stabilizers of those infinitesimal spheres within Notation-0:  https://81018.com/Planck-Polyhedral-Core/ The densities and speed create perfect stacking-packing
  8. Natural gaps within tetrahedrons, octahedrons, dodecahedrons and icosahedrons open dissonance, indeterminacy and creativity (enchantment) which are first measured in and around Notation-64.

As a thought experiment alone, does it open a possible alternative? Thank you.

Sincerely,

Bruce

Second email: 11 August 2019  at 6:10 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Rohan Abeyaratne:

I clicked on the link within Wikipedia, Her spirit will live on in all those who loved her. What a brilliant career. You were very bold and entirely disciplined to have set out for Pasadena in 1975 and achieved such success at one of the USA’s finest schools.

I do have a few quick YES/NO questions:
1. Might we define two of the largest possible mathematical continuums, one for space and other for time?
2. Might we start with Planck’s base units of length and time?
3. Would those units also be the first units? It seems to be just a simple logic. But, perhaps not.

Warmest regards,

Bruce

First email: 11 August 2019 @ 11:57 AM

Dear Prof. Dr. Rohan Abeyaratne:

In three quick steps I had opened and engaged your Volume II, Lecture Notes
Continuum Mechanics (1988, 2012, 2015). In 2011, we naively assumed a simple mathematically-defined boundary condition from the Planck scale through the microscale, human scale, and macroscale by using base-2, simply doubling the Planck base units just over 202 times. https://81018.com/chart/

If it is not totally naive, we may have opened a very fascinating back door to a deeper understanding of our universe. Of course, we were encouraged to make further assumptions and to begin to formulate these as presuppositions: Might we assume that Planck time is the very first unit of time within the universe?  Might we assume that Planck Length is the first spatial dimension?

We then took a bit of a leap of faith in Einstein’s baseline equation to include Planck mass and Planck charge.

Are these resulting 202 notations or doublings worthy of anyone’s time to study?

You are surely in a very unique position to judge that question and I would be most pleased to hear your thoughts about it. Thank you.

Warm regards,

Bruce

###