On following the work of Peter Diamandis…

Editor’s note:  Over the years, Bruce Camber has written to Peter Diamandis, the author of Abundance Insider from PHD Ventures. These are the first posted.  More will be added from prior years.

Peter Diamandis, Abundance Insider, Culver City, CA 90230

Most recent email: 27 November 2018 On being invited to join

Your systems are all all so automated, I am rather sure you don’t know who I am. I have enough memberships. I am looking for people who are critical thinkers and who critically and creatively respond to emails about key issues.

Surround yourselves with thinkers who can take on the universe and get it under control. Worldviews are much too small.

Email: Saturday, 24 November 2018

Abundance Insider needs an integrated universe view so you can teach others to get beyond their limited worldviews!

Imputing meaning to our mundane activities is a key to our civil society.

If we keep harboring the simplistic constructions of big bang cosmology,
we’ll continue to end up with a solipsism that quickly degrades into a variety of narcissistic expressions where they harvest meaning through a nihilism that adds to all the dystopian nonsense.

If we follow the Planck base units within a mathematical construction that necessarily relates everything, everywhere for all time, perhaps we can re-open old questions such as the very nature of space and time, and finally begin to make a little progress beyond the Standard Models for particle physics and for comsology.


In prior discussions I have suggested to Peter:
1. There is no singularity. The very first fractional moment within space-time is defined by the Planck base units and all the dimensionless constants that define each. Please see the horizontally-scrolled chart.
2. The Universe is highly integrated within 202 base-2 exponential notations from the Planck base units to the current age of the universe. This is a model of the very early universe. The first second takes us into Notation 143 and the first 300 million years (Notation 197) brings us to large-scale structure formation.

“Membership” within his groups is always pricey. Abundance Digital is $1495 per year.

On being introduced to the work of Bruno Abd-al-Haqq Guiderdoni

Bruno Abd-al-Haqq Guiderdoni, Centre de Recherche Astrophysique de Lyon (CRAL)
Observatoire de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1

Associated with Paris Institute of Astrophysics, French National Center for Scientific Research, and Islamic Institute for Advanced Studies (at ISSR); and on the Scientific Advisory Boards of the John Templeton Foundation and the Science and Spiritual Quest 2 of the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (Berkeley, USA)

Homepage(s): Facebook (video), Islam-on-the-web, Islamicity, Twitter, Wikipedia, YouTube

Second email: 15 April 2023 (Saturday) at 10 AM

Dear Prof. Dr. Bruno Abd-al-Haqq Guiderdoni:

I have now researched your work a bit more and have enough references that I’ve created a page of references to further explore. I’ll also enclose a copy of my notes to you (this page). At my age, it is necessary. What has happened within all our years of living? Are we making a difference that is good?

In recent years I’ve begun to believe that we have not started simply enough.

What is the most simple construct in all that we know? Could it be the circle and sphere? A point. Two points. A line. A line with one point in motion. I’ve continued here: https://81018.com/continuity-symmetry-harmony/

Might you take a look? With your background, you just might find this work intriguing and might encourage or discourage further work. Thank you. Thank you.

Most sincerely,


First email: 15 November 2018

Dear Prof. Dr. Bruno Abd-al-Haqq Guiderdoni:

Can we apply base-2 exponentiation (simple doublings) to the Planck base units? It seems straight forward, however, the results are startling.

In 202 doublings, we have a simple mathematical map of the universe. If the numbers associated with each doubling are studied, most of the 202 doublings are about the early universe. Notation 143 contains the first second. Notation 197 contains the beginning of large structure-formation.

Here are the numbers: https://81018.com/chart/ Though entirely idiosyncratic, I think there is something here.

We started this project in a high school geometry class in 2011 — https://81018.com/home/ — with just the Planck Length. We did not introduce Planck Time until 2014 and Planck Mass and Planck Charge until 2015. So, really we have just begun to study and attempt to understand these numbers in light of current theories
within cosmology and physics. It is entirely provocative!

Would you comment on our work, please? The current homepage is my latest attempt to spotlight key ideas and problems. Thank you.



Compliments and a question for Ian Hugh White…

Ian H. White, Deputy Vice Chancellor of the University
Master of Jesus College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK

On this website: Listing with other scholars

First email: 14 November 2018

Dear Prof. Dr. Ian White,

You understand light perhaps better than most scholars and you have seen the Light as well! With extraordinary accomplishments — in excess of 900 papers and 30 patents — all while serving as the Master of Jesus College has to be perfectly inspired.

As well, I thank you for all your efforts to increase the throughput of the web. Just brilliant.

I write to you to inquire about Max Planck’s work with his equations from 1899-1905, all now understood as the Planck base units. His simple definition of Planck Time is tP = lP/that is, Planck Time is equal to Planck Length divided by the speed of light. Of course, therefore, light is equal to Planck Length divided by Planck Time.

It is a curious equation.

If we were to apply base-2 notation (doublings) to the Planck units, of course the equation holds true but it becomes a variable speed of light across all of the 202 notations from those base units to the Age of the Universe and the size of the universe. That it all seems to suggest that space and time are discrete, quantized, and derivative could be a welcomed shift in perspective given Einstein’s work and our current bottlenecks within theoretical physics.

This may all just be silliness; it’s idiosyncratic for sure. Notwithstanding, do you think there could be something here to explore further?  Thank you.

Most sincerely,



Exploring this paper by the Weinberg Theory Group

Related Pages on this site: The First Three Minutes Revisited, Letters

String Theory and Quantum Field Theory:
From the Planck Scale to the Hubble Scale

Steven Weinberg, Jacques Distler, Can Kilic, Sonia Paban (IAS), Willy Fischler and Vadim Kaplunovsky of
University of Texas Austin, Austin, TX, United States

This award funds the research activities of Professors Jacques Distler, Willy Fischler, Can Kilic, Sonia Paban and Steven Weinberg of the Theory Group at the University of Texas at Austin

“Since its foundation, the Theory Group has had a strong track record of conducting research on a broad range of topics with the goal of exploring the fundamental laws of nature. These topics include the dynamics of the very early universe, the relationship between information and black holes (which may lead to crucial insights into the fundamental theory of gravity), the possible extensions of the Standard Model of particle physics (which describes all known particles and their interactions) and the experimental signatures of such extensions, and the exploration of string theory and formal aspects of quantum field theory. This diversified effort to improve our understanding of nature at the deepest levels is well aligned with the goal of advancing the national interest by maintaining and further boosting the role of the United States as the global leader in theoretical high-energy physics. The Theory Group is also actively committed to making physics accessible to a wider audience and achieving a substantial impact outside of academia. This is achieved through popular lectures given to live audiences as well as over other media, through the publication of books at both the public and technical levels, and through the development of web technologies. In addition, the Theory Group takes pride in the training of graduate students and postdocs who continue on to successful careers in this field.

“Specifically, the avenues of research to be conducted during the term of this project include, but are not limited to, the following: Distler will extend the classification of N=2 four-dimensional superconformal field theories and explore a generalization of important results in topological string theory. Fischler will continue his exploration of the physical effects of theta angles on black hole horizons and their experimental signatures as seen by observers hovering at a fixed distance from black holes. He will complete his research on the effects of shockwaves in de Sitter space and the implications for holographic information. He will study the description of mixmaster universes in the context of AdS/CFT. Fischler will also continue his longstanding work on holographic space-time and revisit the initial conditions for inflation. Kilic will explore aspects of collider physics as well as models of dark matter and their experimental signatures. Paban will study theories of inflation with many fields and the conditions under which they reach the adiabatic limit at the end of inflation. Weinberg will continue the search for a modified version of quantum mechanics that will avoid the usual unsatisfactory aspects while retaining the successes of the existing theory.”

$510,000: 2016 Project Grant from National Science Foundation (NSF)

A letter to CERN

Matthew Donald Chalmers, Editor
CERN Courier
Geneva, Switzerland

Articles: Nobel work shines a light on particle physics 12 October 2018
________ Model physicist (Steven Weinberg), 13 October 2017
________ Forsaken pentaquark particle spotted at CERN, Nature, July 2015
________ Bigger than the HiggsNew Scientist, March 2016
________ Physics World, Stringescape, September 2007

Also, see: Fabiola Gianotti, CERN Accelerating, CERN

First email: 22 October 2018

Dear Editor-in-chief, Matthew Chalmers:

First, we thank you for your fascinating account from 10 September 2018,
The Large Hadron Collider: 10 years and counting and for your 31 August 2018 article,
The day the world switched to particle physics.

We also found Ruth Leopold’s posting of Lucio Rossi’s work from 31 August 2018,
Viewpoint: Lessons from the accelerator frontier. It is all quite fascinating.

In the photograph of the proton tracks, could you tell us at what resolution are they measuring? What would be the size of each of the two protons? How much smaller can the Large Hadron Collider see?
Can it “see” things smaller than 1×10-16 meters? (certainly below 10-15m, the proton radius)
Might you know at what resolution do the scientist-scholars believe we will begin to “see” strings as in string theory? (10-34 meters was Matt’s answer.)

Thank you.

Most sincerely,


PS. Matt gave us permission to use the image of the two proton tracks on our website.  Of course, he expect that credit is given. Apparently he does not have his own personal homepage or homepage at CERN.

How Quantum Uncertainty Emerge from Deterministic Bohmian Mechanics? by
Albert Solé, Xavier Oriols, Damiano Marian, Nino Zanghì, 4 Oct 2016

On discovering the work of Renate Loll and Causal Dynamical Triangulations


Renate Loll, Radboud University, High Energy Physics
Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics
Nijmegen, Netherlands

Articles: Causal structure (2020), The Universe from Scratch (ArXiv 2005)
ArXiv: Renormalization Group Flow in CDT (2014); CDT and Cosmology (2017)
Video: Emergence of quantum spacetime from causal dynamical triangulations
Wikipedia: Causal Dynamical Triangulations (CDT)

Most recent and fifth email: Friday, 17 April 2022

Dear Prof. Dr. Renate Loll:

You may appreciate these 12 questions from today’s homepage. Your comments would be highly regarded. Thank you.

Most sincerely,


PS. Here are the questions slightly abbreviated. -BEC

  1. Is it possible that the first instance of the universe is defined by Planck’s base units
  2. Is it possible that the first manifestation of those base units is an infinitesimal sphere?
  3. Might the characteristics of pi describe those spheres? 
  4. Might the Fourier Transform impart either electromagnetism or gravitation to each sphere?
  5. Is it possible that one sphere manifests per unit of length and time?
  6. If so, doesn’t that compute to 539 tredecillion spheres per second using Planck units and 4605 tredecillion units per second using Stoney time?
  7. Is it possible that the densities within the earliest notations are on the order of a blackhole?
  8. To create some sense of order with the generation of infinitesimal spheres, may we use base-2 notation?
  9. Using base-2 notation, are there 202 base-2 notations from Planck Time to the current time? 
  10. Is the calculation significant at one second where that Planck Length multiple is a very close approximation of the distance light travels in that second?
  11. Is it significant that quantum fluctuations are measured within Notation-67? Notation-72 appears to be the limit of our abilities to measure a duration of time.
  12. Would these notations, 1-64, provide 64 possible redefinitions of a point-particle? (And, I would add a vertex.)
Fourth email: Friday, 17 April 2021

Dear Prof. Dr. Renate Loll:

Causal dynamic triangulation describes a most fundamental process.

Is there any possibility that Causal Dynamical Triangulations (CDT) could be related to cubic close packing of equal spheres? Within the Wikipedia entry, I see that John Baez is among those who are editing that page. That’s excellent. That entry identifies just three people, you, Jan Ambjørn and Jerzy Jurkiewicz as its lead architects and then Fotini Markopoulou and Lee Smolin as people who’ve popularized it. I have come back to CDT because by its very nature, it must see the nothingness beyond-the-unseen and intuit, then articulate the very essence of a beginning point for space-time.

Yet, given our rather naive work since December 2011 (high school is high school) and our entirely idiosyncratic approach — going within the tetrahedron-octahedron the 112 base-2 steps to around the Planck scale then out the 90-steps to the current time — I also ask, “Could spacetime be fully 3-dimensional near the Planck scale?” In my stretched logic I see an infinitesimal sphere manifesting, sphere stacking and packing (from Kepler to Hales to Zong). CDT comes quickly but later. Possible or just silliness?

As usual I let scholars know when I quote them or use their image to go to this page or footnotes to discuss your work. Though still in process, you are back on today’s homepage here: https://81018.com/questions-1/ The footnotes and references are just now being developed. To attempt to facilitate discussions, I have asked a few questions of my visitors: https://81018.com/questions-1/#Questions I would be glad to send you another note with just those questions to facilitate a discussion. Thank you.

Warm regards,


Third email: Tuesday, 18 June 2019

Yes, you are back up on our homepage today: https://81018.com/believed/
Essentially, inspired by Murray Gell-Mann, I thought you would want to know.

In light of the Ellis Physics on Edge harangue, virtually touching everyone who has been a leading thinker in the past 20 years, right to the final paragraph with Dawid-Rovelli, I repeat the John Wheeler 1986 statement within his article, “How Come the Quantum?” where he says, “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?”

These simple numbers may bear him out: https://81018.com/chart/
Simple processes, like Euler’s equations and base-2 notation give us an entire range of unexplored numbers from the second notation to at least the 64th notation. That’s a science unto itself. Pure math, perhaps the string theorists could finally claim a home.

It is easy to write off simplicity, yet someday these numbers will be explored by the likes of somebody as informed as you are. Thank you.

Most sincerely,


Second email: Sunday, 27 January 2019

Perhaps the earlier email (below) was buried. Perhaps this base-2 model is just too absurd to acknowledge. I am just a simple guy following simple logic.

On one of our homepages I suggest that these are our primary assumptions:

1. The Planck base units of length, time, mass and charge describe a real reality.

2. The conceptual door to this infinitesimal universe is where all four Planck base units concresce (grow together, yet individuate) to create a stream of infinitesimal spheres. Though physical, length-time are well below thresholds of measurement, the progression of mass-charge units can be studied. These four units are, in some manner of speaking, the Janus-face of each other and of light.

3. Conceptually, sphere stacking becomes cubic-closest packing; tetrahedrons and octahedrons emergeDoublings beginOur universe emerges. Their numbers eventually begin to define things within our current scientific realities. This is a natural inflationAnd, it’s not dark.

Since December 2011, I have been carrying on in this light, slowly, intentionally, but naively. I wish somebody of your stature and command of all the academic fields involved would take a moment and put a stop to this effort if it is sheer poppycock. Thank you ever so much.



First email: 21 October 2018

Dear Prof. Dr. Renate Loll:

Thank you for all your work linked (just above), particularly your efforts to discern “…a consistent theory of quantum gravity which describes the dynamical behaviour of spacetime geometry on all scales.”

Our focus has been on the Planck scale. We believe there it has more to contribute than meets the eye.

Between the Planck scale and “CERN-scale of measurements,” there are 67 doublings (or notations or causal sets) of the Planck base units.

[If we assume the very first instant of the universe is that which is defined by Planck Time and Planck Length and Planck Mass and Planck Charge and that there is a natural base-2 expansion, the 202nd notation includes the current day and time].

Perhaps it might be better to start at the first doubling and to observe the logical possibilities.

Essentially we’d be building a unified theory of mathematics, yet this one would be based more on John Wheeler’s sense of simplicity (I love his introduction of this article, How Come the Quantum?) than on Robert Langland’s programs. Langland’s needs the plancksphere that both Max Planck and Wheeler anticipated.

Might other factors like Causal Dynamical Triangulations (CDT), Regge calculus, fractal structure, 2-D spacetime, and the flavors of the simplex be included in an appropriate build-out and within an appropriate doubling?

I think that the emergence at the Planck base units, the simplest planckspheres may well account for what we know as dark matter and dark energy. Ours is a relatively simple assumption.

Among all the people to whom I write, I suspect you can debunk this concept most quickly; or, you may be surprised at its simplicity and possibility. Of course, the derivative, discrete nature of space-time is necessary and I think we would do well to redefine the infinite with mathematical terminology and anticipate a finite-infinite transformation possibly further defining the renormalization process..

To say the least, I would enjoy hearing from you.

Most sincerely,

PS. I first became aware of your work through the Perimeter Institute’s 2016 conference, Time in Cosmology I write letters to focus my thoughts in conjunction with the thoughts and work of a person who appears to be vibrant, open, in love with life, and filled with questions.

Follow-up Causal Dynamical Triangulations (CDT): CDT and Cosmology:
•  Non-renormalizability of perturbative quantum gravity
•  FLRW paradigm:  Physics Beyond the Standard Models of Particles, Cosmology and Astrophysic.
•   Imposing homogeneity and isotropy on spatial slices of constant time, t.
•   So-called “backreaction” effect of inhomogeneities on smaller scales on the dynamics of the universe on larger scales
•   “…an explicit realization of a non-perturbative, Planckian quantum dynamics…”

More Work to do (further research):
•  Path integrals and Gaussian fixed point. See Assaf Shomer’s on page 7: “The derivation of the path integral formula in quantum mechanics of a massive particle involves chopping up the quantum evolution into very short time intervals and inserting complete sets of states between them.”
•  Doplicher S, Fredenhagen K, Roberts JE (1995) The quantum structure of spacetime at the Planck scale and quantum fields. Communications in Mathematical Physics 172(1):187–220
•  Scale invariance and conformal symmetries

Upon learning about the work Jenann Ismael…

Jenann Ismael, Department of Philosophy, Columbia University, New York, NY

Articles: Passage, Flow, and the Logic of Temporal Perspectives
Homepage(s): Columbia, CV, QISS, Wikipedia, YouTube

References within this website: https://81018.com/2016/06/30/perimeter/
See: Foundational Questions Institute (FQXi)

Second email: January 30, 2022 @ 5:55 PM

RE: FQXi article by John Farrell, “Can Time Be Saved From Physics?” regarding Craig Callender’s Lakatos award-winning bookWhat Makes Time Special?” Columbia University philosopher Jenann Ismael notes that timing played a role in the meeting’s success. “I think many of us had been coming to the same ideas from different directions, and—with Craig’s book just out for a while, and Carlo Rovelli’s The Order of Time released the first day of the conference—it felt like kind of a moment,” she says. Ismael notes that while participants at the meeting were able to learn from others from different disciplines, there are still huge points of contention between the different academic cultures. Physicists in general, are “more inclined to dismiss passage, flow and the sense of openness of the future as illusions,” she says.


Dear Prof. Dr. Jenann Ismael:

I would like to respond to your comments above from within John Farrell’s article, “Can Time Be Saved From Physics?” My question: “Why can’t we use the Planck base units as a starting point?”

Here is a copy of my post about that article:

Planck Time (tP) opens basic questions. First, tP is a direct correlation and necessary relation with a length and light in much the same way Einstein’s well-known equation, e=mcnecessarily and dynamically relates mass, energy and light. These four Planck base units are each natural units using fundamental universal constants to define them. Could these four base units and light (and the dimensionless constants that contribute to the essential natural of the Standard Model of Physics) be the very first moment in time? Could the universe start cold on one hand and hot on the other? “Light” blasts In on one hand, and an infinitesimally “cold” (close to absolute zero Kelvin) start on the other. Impossible? Planck Temperature light on one side an infinitesimally first particle defined by Planck Length and Planck Time on the other. A primordial, archetypal sphere coming at you at one sphere per unit of Planck Time renders 539 tredecillion spheres per second. That’s a nice expansion. If the light is cooling according to the inverse square law, we have dynamics that John Archibald Wheeler’s creativity never imagined. It’s Johnny’s old quantum foam. Now, what if there is an application of cubic close packing of equal spheres (ccp) at this scale and the stacking amounts to a doubling? Within 202 doublings of base-2 notations these Planck base units have become the age of the universe, the size of the universe, the total mass of the universe, and the total energy of the universe, and yes, it is still happening right now. Crazy, yes! Idiosyncratic, yes! But why not explore such a simple model? Some aspect of all that has been our effort since December 2011: https://81018.com  To see a chart of the numbers and to get a sense of the emergence and natural inflation: https://81018.com/10-years/

It is too simple, so simple it seems a bit of silliness.  But if you look at the numbers, there is a sweet logic that prevails. https://81018.com/calculations https://81018.com/validate/

I would be very pleased to hear from you. Thank you.

First email: 19 October 2018

Dear Prof. Dr. Jenann Ismael:

I started seeing references to you and your work regarding the structure of space and time. Then, came FQXi, then symmetry, Rovelli’s work, a conference about time at Perimeter… so I started to investigate. When I do, I create this little reference page along with a copy of my notes as I struggle to see how it all fits together.

Since December 2011 we have been studying an application of base-2 notation from the Planck base units to the age and size of the universe. We know well that it falls outside the normal work within physics-philosophy-mathematics today. But, such a simple concept renders rather unusual-even surprising results:
• There are just over 202 doublings. Our working numbers: https://81018.com/chart/
• Too small to measure, the first 64 notations: https://81018.com/64-notations/
• Does it address the derivative structure of space-time? https://81018.com/c/
• The doublings create a natural inflation: https://81018.com/ni/
• Perhaps it is just too simple. The first second emerges within the 143rd notation.
• The 202nd notation has a processing speed of 10.9816 billion years and I am not sure what it means to be just 2.8 billion years into it!

I thought you might find it all of interest. I don’t think it’s just poppycock… If it is, it seems we’ll have to re-examine the foundations of logic, mathematics, and integrity, and the concepts of continuity and symmetry!

On leave from Columbia, I hope your work is going very well and you are making very special progress. I would be delighted to hear from you either way, poppycock or not poppycock!

Thank you.



Upon discovering the work of George Johnson…

George Johnson, Santa Fe, New Mexico


Most recent email: 17 October 2022 at 3:30 PM

Hi George,

I’m 75 and still at it and I hope you are, too. The webpages of http://81018.com have seen a fair amount of activity and just today, I noticed somebody visiting our page about your work.

What more should we say about you and your work? https://81018.com/2018/10/19/johnson/ (this page)

I keep making a nuisance of myself among our leading thinkers, especially those who are hostile to anybody who dares to walk on the holy grounds of big bang cosmology. I think the results of the work of the James Webb Space Telescope, especially the smoothness of the earliest universe will challenge them most profoundly. Eventually somebody will begin to be open to an infinitesimal start at the Planck base units. Of the 17 epochs of the big bang, base-2 notation mimics those epochs, with some slight modifications and as ongoing processes, very well.

Were you able to explore our chart of 202 notations? https://81018.com/chart/
We thought it was a good STEM tool initially: https://81018.com/stem/
The most recent homepages tell the story: https://81018.com/pages/

Today’s homepage might be a bit of a stretch: https://81018.com/reason/

Best wishes to you always,


First email: 2013 Updated: 19 October 2018

Dear Mr. Johnson:

References: (1) http://talaya.net    http://sciwrite.org/
RE: “How Is the Universe Built? Grain by Grain

Dear Mr. Johnson:

This note is a slight re-write of an email sent in 2013. The links have all been updated and some parts deleted to shorten it a bit.

“I will be quoting from your New York Times article, “How is the Universe Built?” If the NYT is not displaying it, we have a backup. Password: 1999

I had wished that I had read it much earlier. I also wished that I met you when we were filming in Santa Fe for our television series about best business practices on PBS-TV in the USA and Voice of America-TV around the world.

The yoctometer. In 2013 from Google there were just 6070 references. Now five years later it is up to 44,700. People are starting to study the very, very small.

“Have you ever seen base-2 exponential notation applied to the Planck base units to Age of the Universe and the observable universe? There are 202.34 doublings or steps. We couldn’t find it, so created a little chart for our high school geometry and physics classes. The most recent chart is here: https://81018.com/chart (horizontally-scrolled)

“I thought you might find these pages of some interest.”

“One of the homepages looks at dark matter and dark energy: https://81018.com/dark/

“I have been looking at all this since 1970, but could never quite get my chops up as a mathematician, but I had a few friends who did.”

“As a result of your article I am now exploring Rovelli and Smolin but, of course, I love the way you write and the clarity you bring to difficult subjects. It should help me in my preparations to explain the Big Board to 6th graders! Geometry, parameters, boundary conditions, transformations and numbers: Is there a simpler way?”

Thank you for all that you do. Your work is all very much appreciated!



Hazewinkel, Michiel

Michiel Hazewinkel

Burg. s’Jacoblaan 18
1401 BR Bussum
The Netherlands

ArXiv: Symmetry vs Symmetry, Niceness theorems
Books: Algebraic and Geometric Methods in Nonlinear Control Theory

First email: 19 October 2018

Dear Prof. Dr. Michiel Hazewinkel:

You are so right. The beautiful, the nice, the charming, and the simple need to become a formal study. Let’s take it on. Will you help me with the mathematics?

I am starting from a peculiar place, the Planck Base Units; and, I have applied base-2 so the universe is mapped in 202 notations:

1. The numbers: https://81018.com/chart
2. Discussion related to Dark Matter and Dark Energy: https://81018.com/dark/
3. A discussion related to the first 64 notations: https://81018.com/64-notations/
4. It has a very humble history: https://81018.com/home/

Could I interest you? It could mess up your rather brilliant reputation!


Most sincerely,

On learning about the work of Barry C. Barish…

Barry Clark Barish, Linde Professor of Physics Emeritus
California Institute of Technology,  Pasadena, California
UC Riverside, Director of the Global Design Effort, International Linear Collider

ArXiv: Search for gravitational waves from a long-lived remnant of the binary neutron star merger GW170817 (October 2018)
Homepage(s): CV, Nobel Prize 2017, Twitter (Nobel Prize), Wikipedia

From 2physics.com: “5 Needed Breakthroughs” from Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Understanding what is the dark energy in the universe? We don’t even have a good idea…
What is the dark matter? (This is the other big unknown, but at least we have some handles. We know it is non-baryonic and evidence points to either supersymmetric particles, or maybe axions. Perhaps it is neither.)
What causes mass? (We have a very successful theory of particle physics, but the particles are massless. We need to understand the source of mass. The leading idea is that it is the Higgs mechanism, and we need to see if there is a Higgs particle or variant to make the next step. The Large Hadron Collider at CERN should answer this question.)
Is the neutrino its own antiparticle? (This is a puzzle going back to Fermi and perhaps the next generation of experiments will resolve it by looking for neutrino-less double beta decay.)
Is there ultimate unification of the forces of nature? (This is a long term intriguing simplification on our understanding of particles and fields, but present data does not support it. However, if there is a new symmetry in nature (supersymmetry) it could bring this unification.)

First email: 19 October 2018

Dear Prof. Dr. Barry C. Barish:

To begin to get a modest understanding of your work, I have started my own page of references, along with a copy of this note: https://81018.com/2018/10/15/barish/ (this page).

I found your work through a webpage from March 07, 2007 listing your five needed breakthroughs (just above). Although you might re-prioritize that list today, it seems that most respectable scientists would still agree with you just as it is.

We have just begun to address some of those questions. Although we have no pedigree, since December 2011 we have been studying an application of base-2 notation from the Planck base units to the age and size of the universe.

Such a simple concept renders rather surprising results:
• There are just over 202 doublings. Our working numbers: https://81018.com/chart/
• Too small to measure, the first 64 notations: https://81018.com/64-notations/
• We ask: Can this be where the answers to your questions are?
• The notations create a natural inflation: https://81018.com/ni/
• The first second emerges within the 143rd notation.
• The 202nd notation is 10.9816 billion years so we are just 2.8 billion years into it.

I thought you might find it all of interest. I don’t think it’s just poppycock. If it is, it seems we’ll have to re-examine the foundations of logic and mathematics, the nature of integrity, and the concepts of continuity and symmetry.

Thank you.