Jon Butterworth, University College of London (UCL), London, England UK Also: DESY
• Article: Six ways we could finally find new physics beyond the standard model, 2023;
Life & Physics – in pictures, Guardian, 2014
• ArXiv (92): Highlights of EPS HEP, 2019
• Book: Smashing Physics
• CERN LHC – Part of the CERN teams, confirmed Higgs boson (2012) and diphoton (2016)
• Homepage(s): Cosmic Shambles CV, NewScientist, Personal, Twitter (X), UCL, Wikipedia, YouTube
Within this website: https://81018.com/butterworth/; https://81018.com/butterworth-mail/
Quick note: 19 Feb 2024
Some didn’t like the lack of formatting in that article sent and linked on Feb 7. Very similar, but with a positive attitude and a more classic format: https://81018.com/reformat/
Fourth email: 9 February 2024
Dear Prof. Dr. Jon Butterworth:
This is my fourth email since 29 September 2023. That’s too much from someone outside your scholarly-circles. It’ll be my last one for at least a year.
Commensurate with my two initial questions, I have written up a quick summary of the failures of big bang cosmology: https://81018.com/bbc/ There is a relatively small gang of us, many high school teachers and friends, who are also asking, “Where is the failure of logic and mathematics within our base-2 progression?” If you know, we would be so grateful to learn from you.
Warmly,
Bruce
PS. Any changes or updates, please advise me! It’ll get done. -BEC
Third email: 9 October 2023
Dear Prof. Dr. Jon Butterworth:
The more I thought about the results of JWST and all the anxiety it is creating about the LambdaCDM, our two Standard Models, and big bang cosmology, your articles in the New Scientist are increasingly important for us all.
Those two questions to you in my first email to you was actually the first email directly to one of authors in that issue of the New Scientist. I wondered if you are OK with it all. Corrections, updates?
That homepage is https://81018.com/butterworth/ I have three more days of editing on it before it actually becomes the site’s homepage. Typically, a homepage with see as many as 2000 uniques before a next new homepage.
Again, I thank you so much for all that you do.
Warmest regards,
Bruce
Second email: 2 October 2023
Dear Prof. Dr. Jon Butterworth:
The JWST has surely awakened the BSM and “new physics” thinking! If we use a simple base-2 notation for 13.8 billion years from the Planck’s base units, there are just 202 doublings. Known particles pick up at Notations 65-67 leaving 64-doublings for something.
Let’s give that playground to Langlands, strings, LQG, SUSY, and the others!
Perhaps it can also be used to define hypothetical particles. It is just mathematics and logic.
Best wishes,
Bruce
First email: 29 September 2023 at 1:30 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Jon Butterworth:
Thank you for your lifetime of work and reflections on the meaning and value of life and the structure of the universe. Now, I write because and your work at DESY and LHC grounds you deep inside particles. Getting beyond smashing particles will not be easy.
I am hoping that you might answer two basic questions:
- Do you think the JWST images of galaxies inside the 300 million-year-mark from the start of the universe may begin smashing the Big Bang as we know it?
- Do you think we might take a second look at the Planck base units, and by accepting the smoothness data from so many different sources now, ask the question, “How might the universe grow by “one infinitesimal sphere at a time” at a rate of one plancksphere per unit of Planck Time and Planck Length?
Thank you.
Most sincerely,
Bruce
PS. We can hold the Standard Model in place and be betting on a new infrastructure of math and logic whereby Langlands, strings, supersymmetries, hypothetical particles, conformal gravity, and so on get their chance to add details from the Planck scale to the electroweak scale.
Thanks again for your contribution to Six ways we could finally find new physics beyond the standard model, New Scientist, 6 September 2023 -BEC
###
~