TO: Yashar Akrami, International Center for Fundamental Physics, École Normale Supérieure (ENS), Paris, France
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Homepage(s): Research: (1) Cosmic anomalies and observational tensions (2)
Cosmic topology (3) Early-universe cosmology (4) Dark matter, (5) AI and others
Parameter inference with a non-Gaussian likelihood in Fourier and configuration space
Third communication: 18 June 2026 (updated)
Dear Prof. Dr. Yashar Akrami:
Let’s reinvent the physics of the universe. We’ll start with a toy model at the Planck scale and we will assume it is the first step, the first moment of the universe. Simple math and logic suggest that one unit of Planck Time-and-Length, renders one unit of X. One possibility of X is an infinitesimal shell sphere; that renders 18.5 tredecillion shell spheres per second. Those spheres would readily generate enough tetrahedrons and octahedrons to begin to construct the universe.
When we started this project, we were going smaller, deeper and deeper inside the tetrahedron by dividing the edges of the tetrahedron in half and connecting those new vertices. In 45 steps within, we were down in scale for particle physics; and in 67 more steps, we had entered the scale of the Planck base units, first for Planck Length and later for Planck Time. We then used those Planck base units to multiple by 2. In 112 steps we were back in the classroom. Then we had an unexpected surprise when we discovered only 90 additional notations brought us out to the size and age of the universe.
We were excited to have developed our own in-house STEM tool. Then, we slowly learned that it flew in the face of the big bang cosmology. We pulled it out of our curriculum because it was confusing for our recently graduated seniors, especially those majoring in physics and astronomy.
We had been initially guided by Frank Wilczek (MIT) and Freeman Dyson (IAS). I then wrote to scholars around the world, even Stephen Hawking and Alan Guth. Our project had a simple logic. In some measure, it was totally predictive. In time it had the four basic irrational numbers applied to an unusual geometry based on infinities. Continuity-symmetry-harmony
How can we be so wrong with so many basics are in play?
Would you advise us?
Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
PS.
Second communication: 18 February 2025 (Online - https://yashar-akrami.com)
1980 (Spring Semester): Institut Henri Poincaré
Tuesdays with Olivier Costa de Beauregard
Thursdays with Jean-Pierre Vigier
Focus: EPR paradox and Aspect’s research
Context: https://81018.com/foundations/
Reference page: https://81018.com/essence/
First communication: 30 August 2021
Subject: The symphony of all symphonies
Dear Prof. Dr. Yashar Akrami:
The orchestration is so entirely fine-tuned and dynamic, perhaps the causal infrastructure is as simple as base-2 applied to infinitesimal base units (like those from Planck or Stoney) as captured here: http://81018.com/chart/ and examined here: https://81018.com/empower/
I am starting a review here: https://81018.com/cdm/
Best wishes,
Bruce
###