CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY. GOALS.October 2023
PAGES: π (pi) |.ASSUMPTIONS.|.FOOTNOTES |.REFERENCES|. EMAILS.| IM | PARTICIPATE.| Zzzzs

Between Particles and Planck’s Natural Units
by Bruce E. Camber

“…after the Big Bang.” In July 2022 the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) released its first findings and astonished the world, especially scholars and scientists who were not expecting to see galaxy formations inside 300 million years. It begged the question, “How could these new images and data be reconciled with big bang cosmology’s ΛCDM?” Confirming earlier findings of other space telescopes about smoothness, it became quickly obvious to the realists that the words, “…after the Big Bang” would take on yet another meaning. In the midst of this turmoil, the London-based popular publication, New Scientist came out with an issue (6 Sept. 2023) with three related articles (eight authors) to these issues. We first engaged one of the three articles titled, Six ways we could finally find new physics beyond the standard model.^[*]

Our thanks go out to New Scientist. They first turned to particle physicists, Jon Butterworth (below) and Alex Keshavarzi (a muon expert) for new insights. -BEC

Scientific American (Sept 2022) opened a general discussion. The New Scientist continues it.¹

Jon Butterworth, University College of London physics professor,² also works at CERN LHC, aka the Large Hadron Collider.³ He was a key person to confirm the existence of the Higgs boson. He informs the public as part of Cosmic Shambles.⁴ Writing voluminously about particle physics, he’s among the world’s experts when it comes to Smashing Physics.⁵ His Wikipedia summaries provide more details and many references.⁶

Butterworth says that he’ll be looking at billions of new collisions “…most closely for evidence of new physics beyond the standard model.” He knows better than anybody what to analyze; he invented methodologies used by particle physicists today. So impressed, I wrote to him:

That email to Prof. Dr. Jon Butterworth is from the heart. I visited CERN on three occasions over the past 50 years. It’s an impressive facility with tens of thousands of people involved locally and hundreds of thousands from around the world. I am nervous for them and for all the scholars and scientists who have vested their lifetime in trying so nobly to define their work within the confines of big bang cosmology. Given the data and images from James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the big bang is being scrutinized like no time in its history. The great defenders of that faith, initially shell-shocked, are grappling with redefinitions. Notwithstanding, most everybody is puzzled about what comes after this latest assault on the big bang and its “infinitely-small, infinitely-hot, infinitely-dense point…” (Stephen Hawking, Genius, PBS-TV, 2016).

“Where would we be without the big bang?”
The answer is, “Exactly where you are.”

I will say as loudly and clearly as possible, “Your work is not for naught.” Big bang cosmology has caused you to be more assiduous. The results of that work are largely correct. The big bang timeline is largely correct. The key: it is readily and easily replaced by a natural inflation from the Planck scale. Though very hard to believe, there is less than a second’s difference between that natural inflation and the epochs defined by the Big Bang and used by the Lambda CDM. Check it out. A second’s difference will not affect your work. Your results do not need to come after a big bang that no longer fits the picture!

Yet, Big Bang cosmology is so ingrained within science today, it appears that none of our thought leaders have checked the numbers to see what a natural inflation would look like from the Planck scale. I believe that the more it is analyzed, scholars will find, the more logical it becomes. Simplicity always comes before complexity; and, a most simple infinitesimal sphere is simple. Cubic-close packing of equal spheres generates tetrahedrons, octahedrons and basic structures, and particles and waves quickly follow.

It is still not easy. This natural inflation challenges our commonsense logic, especially our understanding of infinity and time. Although the concept of infinity has been so argued, and I think most of us are quite tired of it, our approach to it was through our analysis of pi (π). There are three qualities of pi that are not quantitative, discrete, and finite. These are continuity-symmetry-harmony. These are qualities and these qualitative processes seem boundless, perhaps infinite. We decided given the history of abuse to ignore standard concepts of infinity and to ascribe these three qualities as the primaries, the starting points, to all things everywhere for all time. It seems to work.

We got to this strange conclusion because we had been living with the Planck base units and our base-2 map of the universe for several years. We thought, If Notation-0 is defined by those units, there must be something there.” Without a big bang in the way, we finally arrived at that something. We decided it is an infinitesimal, most-simple sphere. Then, we discovered that there are no simple spheres. There is a continuity of endless numbers, now calculated out to over 100 trillion digits of pi. There is a symmetry within pi’s generation of spheres that is scale invariant. And, there is harmony within pi’s Fourier transform and its spin states, also known as harmonic functions.

Of course, starting the universe with the oldest, most ubiquitous and versatile equation was fortuitous. And the more we lived with it, the more we liked it. But, there were other challenges.

Time is best understood like Carlo Rovelli’s Now. There have been many distinguished people who have said that all time is now. We came to this conclusion from watching the evolution of the 202 base-2 notations. One could see how the concept of one Plancksphere per unit of Planck Length and Planck Time created a huge thrust of particles that were building on each other. No particle got old; they all built on each other, and logic tells us that they do so to this day. When we compared its natural inflation to the big bang, the disparity was about a picosecond. You’ll just have to take a look at the chart. It’s not easy, but live with it for awhile. You may have insights that we could-and-would never even dream.

There is also a domain of perfection and a geometry of imperfections that has been discussed in many places throughout this website. Yes, quantum fluctuations have a geometry.

And just because there has been so much investment in accelerators around the world, we’ll need a new vision for them that probably will not involve smashing. Perhaps being a little too whimsical, maybe accelerators can be used for harmonizing spins states,⁸ to begin to discern higher levels of integration that involve the first 64 notations.

Of course, there will be even more whimsical ideas.

Conclusions for now. The world is desperate for a new model that could help reopen dialogue about our foundations of understanding. This model is a new wrinkle on space, time and infinity; I beg your patience. It is idiosyncratic, nevertheless we can hope that it helps to open dialogues to understanding. Thank you. -BEC

This page is https://81018.com/butterworth/.

Endnotes & Footnotes
There may not be many because all these points already have pages within this website.

[*] The first article opens the work of Jon Butterworth (NS). The next article by Alex Keshavarzi (NS) is about the ongoing muon research. It is followed by reviews of the work by Clare Burrage (NS) and Surjeet Rajendran (NS). Next up is the work of Emily Adlam and Matt Strassler. The article, Six ways we could finally find new physics beyond the standard model, is one of three being reviewed.

[1] New Scientist September 6, 2023. This issue with the three articles:
• Jon Butterworth (NS), Alex Keshavarzi (NS), Clare Burrage (NS) and Surjeet Rajendran (NS), Emily Adlam and Matt Strassler, Six ways we could finally find new physics beyond the standard model
• Abigail Beall, An alternative way to picture the standard model of particle physics
• Jon Cartwright, A brief history of the standard model, our theory of almost everything

[2] Jon Butterworth. A smile is worth 1000 words. There is openness and receptivity. His work at University College of London (UCL) as physics professor is a key. UCL is consistently rated among the top ten universities in the world. When Jon speaks, the physics community listens. For more about John Butterworth, go to his homepage(s) — Personal, CV, ArXiv (92), New Scientist, Twitter (X), and YouTube.

[4] Making fun of ourselves. Humor, joy and a lack of pomposity within this group’s serious spoofs, Cosmic Shambles, is important. Arrogance is the bane of progress within the sciences. There is so much of it, Max Planck was moved to say, “…science advances one funeral at a time.”

[5] Smashing into the big bang. Jon’s book, Smashing Physics, has become an historical account and reference about the work of particle physics and accelerators. The double entendre was not lost on anyone. Yet, today, with the JWST results bearing down on big bang cosmology, it has taken on a third meaning. First, there is the literal fact of smashing particles together. Then, there are metaphorical facts in the search for a new physics within it all. Yet, now, a third fact emerges, smashing the big bang to bits.

[6] Wikipedia summaries. Of course, Wikipedia has become a somewhat reliable source of early information about people, places, and things. Jon’s overview provides valuable references and resources.

[7] Particle Physics. Looking for others who have a sense of openness is not trivial. If you have suggestions, please share them. We are still on a very steep learning curve. For example, as a result of this exploration, I have just learned about the national accelerator for Germany known as DESY. We are identifying a few of scholar-scientists there who might be open to give us critical feedback.

[8] Future of accelerators. What appears to be whimsical actually is being tested today. There are many references to check out: K. Hubner, CERN, Geneva, Accelerators for high-energy physics; Walter Henning and Charles Shank, Accelerators for America Symposium, June 2010; R.L. Madrak et al, Progress on the design…, 2017; and James Rosenzweig, UCLA, Advanced Accelerator Concepts: From Birth to High Impact Science, 2023; and many, many others.

_____

References & Resources
As references are studied, the key references and resources will be added to this page here.

1. Michael Silberstein, W. M. Stuckey, Timothy McDevitt, Beyond the Dynamical Universe: Unifying Block Universe Physics and Time as Experienced, Oxford (2018); Website: https://www.relationalblockworld.com/ (link has known security problems); ArXiv articles: Mysteries” of Modern Physics and the Fundamental Constants c, h, and G, (October 2021)

2. Tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb

3. The UniverseClock: The simple logic that created the UniverseClock — https://universeclock.com and https://universeclock.org — is the same logic that guides the logic for a grid or matrix of infinitesimal spheres that defines the universe that defines all time and space. In this chart the universe is somewhere around 436,117,076,600,000,000 seconds old. That is in-and-around 13.82 billion years.

4. James Webb Space Telescope Images Challenge Theories of How Universe Evolved, UT News, April 13, 2023

5. JWST early Universe observations and ΛCDM cosmology, Rajendra P Gupta, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 524, Issue 3, September 2023, Pages 3385f,  doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stad2032

6. Bright, early galaxies surprise astronomers,” Kelly Kizer Whitt,  Earth-Sky, November 18, 2022.

_____

Emails There will be emails to many of our scholars about key points.

Halena Abramowicz, 17 October 2023, Tel Aviv University
Rajendra P Gupta, 17 October 2023. Ottawa
Amanda Pagul, 17 October 2023, STSI, Maryland
Kelly Kizer Whitt, 17 October 2023, Earth-Sky, Austin, Texas
Michael Boylan-Kolchin, 13 October, UT-Austin
Kurt Riesselmann, 12 October 2023, Fermilab, Chicago
Michael Duff, 11 October 2023, Imperial College, London
George Ellis, 11 October 2023, University of Cape Town
Will Kinney, 10 October 2023, SUNY-Buffalo
Katherine Freese, 10 October 2023, UT-Austin
Fabiola Gianotti, 9 October 2023, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland

_____

IM There will also be many instant messages to thought leaders about these key points.

16 October 2023: @deepskieslab @Tiana_Athriel @samudre_ashwin Top goal: How deep is it? Down to the Planck scale? Or, out and back to the 300 million year mark? How much further? How do you scale it all? Surprisingly you’ll find just 202 base-2 notations first defined by pi and time. https://81018.com/ might be interesting. –BEC

_____

Participate

You are always invited.

_____

Keys to this page, butterworth

• This page became the homepage on October 14.
• The last update was 25 October 2023.
• This page was initiated on 27 September 2023.
• The URL for this file is https://81018.com/butterworth/
• The headline for this article: Between Particles and Planck’s natural units
• First teaser* is: Open letter to Jon Butterworth and other leading particle physicists

*Or, wicket, kicker or eyebrow.

_____