Stephen Hawking dies on Pi Day, March 14, 2018

by Bruce Camber

Stephen Hawking:  “Now, please, go truly search the complexities of the infinite!”

Stephen Hawking was born January 8, 1942. He noted that it is on the 300th anniversary of Galileo’s death. Others have noted that Hawking death, March 14th, is the anniversary of Einstein’s birth. Thus, several proclaim that time is circular — no beginning, no end! We should be saying that time is derivative and the only time is now.  Every notation of the 202 is active but constantly changing based on what we all do right now.

Pi Day 2018: We awoke this morning in the USA to the BBC news that Hawking had died. Certainly it is symbolic, yet I believe there is a deeper significance to the fact that Hawking died in England on this date. It seems now there is a possibility that Hawking’s cosmology of the “…infinitely small, infinitely hot and infinitely dense” may possibly fade away with him. Of course, we pray that Hawking may now rest in peace. But, let scholarship, especially among the youngest, get on with grasping the full essence of pi at the Planck scale and begin to see how pi opens the gateways between the finite and infinite.

Possibly not as respectful as one should be on the day of one’s passing from the finite to the infinite, and certainly a bit opportunistic, here are a few tweets to people who have made statements about Hawking on the morning of his death:

•  π  •  To the Mayor of London @SadiqKhan who said: “Professor Stephen Hawking not only opened up the secrets of the universe to millions, he lived life with a grace and determination that set an example to all of us. He will be forever remembered and greatly missed.”
My Tweet to Sadiq Khan: Please be careful, Mr. Khan. Hawking did live with determination and set that example for sure. But he also was a Lucasian professor following in Newton’s footsteps. He was often condescending to those he didn’t understand: May he now be at rest!

•  π  •    To the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn @jeremycorbyn
who said: “Stephen Hawking inspired the world with his determination to explain the mysteries of the cosmos. But he also showed breathtaking courage to overcome life’s adversities and a burning passion to protect our National Health Service. He will be greatly missed.”
My Tweet to Jeremy Corbyn: On Hawking’s final day, we shall forgive him, and lay the big bang theory to rest with him: 🙏

•  π  •   To the Prime Minister, Theresa May who said: “Professor Stephen Hawking was a brilliant and extraordinary mind – one of the great scientists of his generation. His courage, humour and determination to get the most from life was an inspiration. His legacy will not be forgotten.”
My Tweet to Theresa May: @10DowningStreet @theresa_may Encourage your children to do “one better” than either Hawking and Newton.
A second Tweet:
•  π  •   To the Prime Minister, Theresa May: @theresa_may  “We have to forgive Stephen for being so convincing. We deferred to him; we could have been tougher. Of the two Lucasian Professors, Hawking (#17) and Newton (#2), I am not sure who did more to throw us off: Yes, it is time to forgive and get to work!

•  π  •    To ,  &  where Tyson said, “Ten days ago my interview with Stephen Hawking first aired on . We offer here a commercial-free posting of that show. 
My Tweet to Tyson and gang:Hawking’s death on this day pulls us into the nature of a sphere and the finite-infinite relation. “Great way to go, Hawking” Let’s redefine infinity so Hawking has a place to go! Let’s work with Turok on the old big bang theory:

On this website:

•  Big Bang Cosmology Opens Us To A Dystopia
•  “The big bang theory is wrong,” says Prof. Dr. Neil Turok
•  If Turok Tells Us That Hawking Is Wrong, The Big Bang Apple Is Falling.
•  Stephen Hawking and Alan Guth Enjoined To Reconsider Big Bang
•  We all make mistakes!
•  Why is there so much hatred and tension in our life and this world?

•  Notes to Stephen Hawking

Ruiz, Hans-Christian

Hans-Christian Ruiz

First email: Tuesday, 13 February 2018

RE: Your article, Introduction to Spin Networks and Towards a Generalization of the Decomposition Theorem which is opened along side two other papers: (1) the 1999 work of John Baez, An Introduction to Spin Foam Models of BF Theory and Quantum Gravity and (2) the most current work of Muxin Han, Zichang Huang and Antonia Zipfel, Spin foam propagator: A new perspective to include a cosmological constant

Dear Prof. Dr. Hans-Christian Ruiz:

Your 2012 paper is very, very helpful. Thank you.

The problem I have with the industry is the inability of its scholars to break free of the mindset within Hawking’s and Newton’s earlier formulations. Both are right about enough things, these Lucasian professors have conjured up an innate fear of disagreeing with either of them about the bigger things. Their longstanding choke hold is their definition of the infinite. I am attempting to apply continuity-symmetry-harmony to bring the infinite back into our equations in a potentially useful way.

Most sincerely,
Bruce Camber
Austin, Texas

Hooft, Gerardus ‘t

Gerardus ‘t Hooft
Institute for Theoretical Physics & EMMEΦ
Centre for Extreme Matter and Emergent Phenomena
Utrecht University  Utrecht

ArXivFree Will in the Theory of Everything
Books: Time in Powers of Ten: Natural Phenomena and Their Timescales, 2015
_ _ _ _ _ In Search of the Ultimate Building Blocks
Nobel Prize
YouTube (and many others)

Update: 8 February 2018   First email: Sun, Jun 16, 2013

References: How to become a GOOD theoretical physicist
One of your pages that the students enjoy: Tilings

Dear Prof. Dr. Gerald ‘t Hooft:

Our geometry classes worked with clear, plastic tetrahedrons and octahedrons. We  created the twenty-tetrahedral icosahedron, and the sixty-tetrahedral dodecahedron (Pentakis dodecahedron). We’ve built models and looked inside each (more pictures here). When asked if there were any questions, one of the students conjured up Zeno and sweetly asked, “How far within can we go?”

Using just the perfectly-fitting octahedron and tetrahedron, on paper we went inside each object about 112 times, dividing by 2 to discover that we were in the range of the Planck Length. We also discovered how each group of models was growing exponentially as we went further inside.

Next class we went the other way. We multiplied by 2 until we were in the range of the Observable Universe. That was just 90 steps. We thought it was very cool until we couldn’t find any references to it on the web. Of course, we found Kees Boeke’s work from the 1957. Back in days long gone by, I often had dinners with Phyllis & Phil Morrison; they helped to popularize Boeke’s work with their classic coffee table book, The Powers of Ten.

Yet, now many of us are asking, “Where do the powers of 2 and base-2 exponential notation fit into the larger picture? Do we live in an exponential universe? Does Euler’s equation capture the universe as well?” We initially thought it was a very good STEM tool, but now we think it just might be more.

Six years later, we are still asking the experts, “What are we doing wrong?” Thanks.



PS. Since our first email (a first-draft of this email), we followed your work with Stefan Vandoren on Time in Powers of Ten: Natural Phenomena and Their Timescales and we have begun to engage your work within ArXiv. Long, long ago I studied the foundations of physics with Abner Shimony and Robert Cohen at BU (1973-1980), and then with David Bohm, Costa de Beauregard, and J. P. Vigier (1977 & 1980). But, I was idiosyncratic.  Siding more with Leibniz than Newton, I began my graduate studies thinking that the essence of the infinite was continuity, symmetry and harmony, not absolute time. Though I enjoy Frank Wilczek’s work (2012 to now),  I am even too idiosyncratic for him. Notwithstanding, if you’ll look at our current chart you will see that only two relatively brief epochs — the Grand Unification and Inflationary Epochs — are defined a little differently.  -BEC

Orion Jones

Orion Jones, Editor
Big Think

Most recent email: 29 January 2018

Dear Orion:

What if the universe is best described by Euler’s equation
and we live in an exponential universe? More… Hawking may have
grasped it when in his 2016 PBS-TV series, Genius, he says,
“Everything in existence (is) expanding exponentially…”
We’ll forgive him when he adds “in every direction.” More…

But, what if Hawking is wrong when he says that we started
from , “…an infinitely hot, infinitely dense point.” Even his old
friend and co-author, Neil Turok, says he’s wrong. But what if
the universe started most simply, but infinitesimally at the Planck
base units of Length and Time, and at the very small Planck Mass
and Planck Charge, and we quietly expanded exponentially?

I invite you to take a look a chart that starts at the Planck Time and goes
to the Age of the Universe (the fullness of time, or the Now) in just 202
base-2 notations. There is enough granularity to see if the numbers cohere
and carry some logic. Chart

What if all these simple numbers within this chart provide
a credible path, a natural inflation imposing a certain isotropy-and-
homogeneity throughout the universe?

What if this natural inflation actually works for electroweak baryogenesis
within the current Standard Model of Big Bang cosmology, i.e. the only parts
of that theory being discounted are the initial conditions and the Inflationary Epoch?

That chart at least posits credible concepts and numbers for the expansion
to the baryogenesis and quark epochs and then to the current time.

What if we’ve had it wrong since 1716 when Leibniz forfeited the debate to Newton
regarding absolute space and time and space-time-light are all profoundly relational?
~Note: The first second of the universe emerges between notations 143 and 144 where
the Hadron Epoch picks up out of the total 202 notations to the current Age of the Universe.

Crazy? Not really. It’s a keyhole to John Wheeler’s plea for simplicity:
“Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that
when we grasp it — in a decade, a century, or a millennium —
we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise?”

As silly as it all sounds, there just may be something to it. Thank you.

Most sincerely,

First email: Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 3:15 PM

Dear Orion –

You might find some of our work to be of interest.
It originates from a high school in New Orleans:

The title of the most recent work,
“How did it all begin? And, what does it mean?”

And just for fun, I’ll provide a link to a bit of writing that asks questions,


Best wishes,


Bruce Camber