Banks, Tom

Tom Banks

Rutgers NHETC (New High Energy Theory Center)
New Brunswick (and across the Rantan River in Piscataway) New Jersey

ArXiv: A Critique of Pure String Theory: Heterodox Opinions of Diverse Dimensions, 2003
The Holographic Space-Time (HST) Model of Cosmology   (5 June, 2018)
Why The Cosmological Constant is a Boundary Condition (31 October 2018)
Google Scholar
Homepage (Rutgers)  Also: University of California Santa Cruz (UCSC)
inSPIREHEP
Wikipedia: “…with Willy Fischler, Stephen Shenker, and Leonard Susskind… originators of M(atrix) theory, or BFSS Matrix Theory, an attempt to formulate M theory in a nonperturbative manner.”
YouTube: A Holographic Quantum Theory of Spacetime

References within this website: https://81018.com/believed/

First email: Sunday, June 16, 2019

Dear Prof. Dr. Tom Banks:

I am fascinated with your work with Willy Fischler, particularly the HST concept that predicts an early era of structure formation, prior to emergence.

Why not engage the Planck units where they are?

If we apply base-2 notation, in 202 successive doublings, we will have encapsulated the universe in a smooth gradient from the most infinitesimal to the current expansion of the universe. Planck Time within the 202nd notation is just 10.9 billion years, so only about 2.8 of it has transpired. The only time asymmetry is in this current notation. Because we intuit the first manifestation of physicality at that first notation is a sphere, we applied cubic close packing of equal spheres as a mechanism for expansion and the Fourier Transform as a key part of the dynamics. Fluctuations come later in those notations where densities begin to allow the gap represented within the pentastar, the icosahedron, etc. I superficially realize how entirely idiosyncratic this construct is.

My checkered history includes meetings and a little work with some of the greats. Yet, the only thing I have published on this topic is on web.

What would you do with it?  It has a simple logic.  It certainly adds a lot of character to our understanding of the very early, most infinitesimal universe. Would you encourage further work?

I am sure you remember that landmark 1999 conference.  I just discovered it and make reference it within the 16 June 2019 homepage .

Thank you.

Warmly,
Bruce

Taking notes from your HST Model of Cosmology article:

The theory of Holographic Space-time (HST) sheds new light on these ancient questions. It posits that “nothing” is actually the state of maximal entropy of the universe, because in that state all degrees of freedom in the universe live on the cosmological horizon, with a dynamics that scrambles information at the maximal rate allowed by causality.” Page 3, first paragraph, ] 5 Jun 2018

asymptotically dS space”  Wikipedia: “…n-dimensional anti-de Sitter space (AdSn) is a maximally symmetric Lorentzian manifold with constant negative scalar curvature.

“…the only way in which a direction (or tangent to a path at a spacetime point) can be distinguished is whether it is spacelike, lightlike or timelike. The space of special relativity (Minkowski space) is an example.”

Weinberg’s 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)

Barish, Barry C.

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)
CV
Homepage
Nobel Prize 2017
Twitter (Nobel Prize)
Wikipedia
YouTube

From 2physics.com: “5 Needed Breakthroughs”

  1. Understanding what is the dark energy in the universe? (We don’t even have a good idea here.)
  2. 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.)
  3. 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.)
  4. 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.)
  5. 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/

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, mathematics, and integrity, and the concepts of continuity and symmetry?

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Bruce

Trnka, Jaroslav

Jaroslav Trnka

TrnkaCenter for ​Quantum Mathematics And Physics
Department of PhysicsUniversity of California, Davis
Davis, CA 95616 USA

ArXivCutting Deep Into The Amplituhedron (Oct. 2018)
ResearchInspire
Resources
Twitter (Jarda’s not active)
Wikipedia (Amplituhedron)
YouTube: Singularity Structure of Gravity Amplitude, 2016, Nordita

Related pages on this website: https://81018.com/redefinition/

Second email: 8 May 2020 at 10:30 AM

Dear Prof. Dr. Jaroslav Trnka:

Would you have a look at this article?
Overview: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3428
Article: https://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Camber_3u.pdf
Does it have any merit?

Thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

First email: 4 August 2018

RE: Key pages within Wikipedia and Google have a few broken links to your work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amplituhedron and  https://sites.google.com/site/grassmannian2014/

Dear Prof. Dr. Jaroslav Trnka:

Many I call you about your fundamental re-thinking
of space, time, infinity, first principles…  Yes, yes, it has been said,
But don’t step on my favorite theory or the special relics of our history.”

Why not see the universe as one big Planck scale whereby various doubling functions kick in and push the base units up to the current size of the universe, the current age of the universe, the current mass of the universe, and the current charge of the universe?

https://81018.com/functions

On Monday, I’ll be at SLAC; are you in the area this summer?
Thank you.

Bruce

PS.  I’ll try to fix the broken links on those two pages
referenced above. Also, with some encouragement I could
start a Wikipedia page for you based on your current pages at QMAP and Davis.

PPS.  Everybody knows “…expanding exponentially in every direction,
from an infinitely small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense point,
creating a cosmos filled with energy and matter. 

(quoting Stephen Hawking) is problematic.

The only difference between the quiet expansion and the big bang theory is the first picosecond which defines the first three epochs in the big bang theory. Yes, their Planck Epoch, Grand Unification Epoch, and Inflationary Epoch are exceedingly short. Within our base-2/Planck scale model, those processes involve as many as forty doublings before the Electroweak processes begin, and as many as another 60 to 100 additional doublings before the Quark-then-Hadron processes begin. And, within this model, we are still within the first second of the unfolding universe. That is a lot of space for pure mathematics and geometries. -BEC


Please note: This page is https://81018.com/2018/08/05/trnka/
It is indexed here: https://81018.com/alphabetical/#T
About these pages: https://81018.com/alphabetical/#Concepts


Nima Arkani-Hamed says, “Spacetime is doomed.”

From an October 2017 homepage:

Nima Arkani-Hamed1 of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Princeton, with a sweeping naturalness, proclaims “Spacetime is doomed2 (go to 5:45 minutes of 1.22.44). Pacing throughout3, his really-real reality is within his ever-so-illusive amplituhedron4 with a string to a planar N.5 He declares that it’s equal to the perturbative topological B-model string theory in twistor space6 (an ever-so-positive Grassmannian7) (related ArXiv article).

To which I reply, “Yes, of course. We knew that.”


1 The first link goes to our correspondence (mostly emails) to Nima Arkani-Hamed. He has also received a few tweets as well.

2 Spacetime is doomed is a YouTube video. If you go to 5:45 minutes of his 1 hour 22 minute lecture, you will hear that indeed, spacetime is doomed. The entire lecture is his focus on this concept.

3 Pace-Man is our affectionate name for Nima, from his pacing back and forth when he gives a lecture.

4 The amplituhedron has a special place within our work. It was one of many basic structures and by no means is the most basic.  The transformations between circles and spheres to lines and tetrahedra and then octahedra are.

We knew that:

5  The N=4 supersymmetric Yang–Mills theory within Wikipedia is entirely readable, but not easily understood.

6 Twistor space

7 Grassmannian

Letters to Stephen Hawking

/Last update: September 27, 2018 We Communicate With Everybody.   Scholars / Specialists

Stephen Hawking (and now his foundation)

Died: March 14, 2018 Born:
Centre for Theoretical Cosmology
Cambridge University, Cambridge, England

Books: The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, CUP, (PDF), 1973
CV PhD thesis
Publications
Website
Wikipedia
YouTube (TED)

References within this website:
• Stephen Hawking was on our homepage.  
Also: https://81018.com/2016/10/16/infinite/
• Hawking was the world’s leading advocate for the big bang theory. In 1975 he published (with G.F.R. Ellis) his first major book about it. In 2012 we were just starting our rather idiosyncratic studies within this domain. By 2014 we began to realize that our little model just might have key numbers for each epoch as theorized by big bang advocates. Surely if the simplicity of these numbers begins to resonate, we would hope to receive some acknowledgement from someone within the University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP). 
• Hawking’s “…infinitely small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense point…” full quote.
• Our first email: August 3, 2014

Please note: Other DAMPT scholars have also received notes over the years. This includes Fred Alford, John Barrow, Michael Cates, Marianne Freiberger, Michael Green, H.Keith Moffatt, David Skinner, David Tong, Maria Ubiali and so many others. And not far away, right their in Cambridge is also Jeremy Nicholas Butterfield. -BEC 29 September 2020

Final email: March 7, 2017, 10:24 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking:

You know that continuity and symmetry are the bedrocks of logic, mathematics, and physics.  However, for the past 100 years we’ve been focused on particles, not the mathematics of continuity.

Of course, there are continuity equations from the Planck scale to the Age of the Universe using base-2, base-10 or any other base.  But base-2 is most simple. And, simple is good.

In the chart — https://81018.com/chart — you can follow how the simple logic of continuity applied here creates a lovely simulation program that mimics the big bang epochs yet through an all-natural, organic inflation. 

Cognitive dissonance works against accepting its simplicity, especially in light of 52 years of particles.

Of course, we would so like to know what you think of that continuity equation in principle and in fact. Thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

Another email: Friday, October 21, 2016, 12:29 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking:

A most-simple natural process by which natural inflation quietly encapsulates the universe uses base-2 notation from the Planck Time to the Age of the Universe to create a matrix of just over 200 columns where each Planck base unit doubling can be readily observed. Though logical, most-simple, integrated, and predictive, this mathematical view of the universe can now be tested, compared and contrasted will all existent measurements within cosmology. Over two-thirds of the entire chart is a focus on the first second of creation (from the first notation through to notation 145). A light year is encapsulated within notation 169. The first aeon, a billion years, is within notation 189. All of human history is easily within a very small part of notation 202. By looking at the raw data, this simple, little model would appear to provide a clear alternative to big bang cosmology. It reinforces the extensive work on natural inflation models, and it provides a very different entry point to questions about Dark Energy and Dark Matter, isotropy, homogeneity, and the very nature of space-and-time and the finite-and-infinite.

Not until February 2014 had anybody done the simple-but-tedious work to double the infinitesimal Planck Time, then double each result 201 times. As a consequence, this application of base-2 notation has not been studied. The 202-column chart of the universe that starts at Planck Time and goes to the Age of the Universe reveals a simple logic for natural inflation that readily mimics the big bang cosmology of Stephen Hawking and Alan Guth.

Because it is an entirely predictive chart, this nascent base-2 model can readily be tested with all existing data from all other models of the universe.

Might you have any comments for us? Thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

P.S. About our model of just over 201 columns:
1. https://81018.com/chart (Please Note: It is a large file that is horizontally scrolled).
2. Alternative to big bang cosmology: https://81018.com/cosmology/
3. Space-time, finite-infinite: https://81018.com/infinite/
4. Stephen Hawking and Alan Guth: https://81018.com/big/

Another email: Monday, June 6, 2016, 5:19 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking (and a warm hello to Jonathan Wood):

It has taken the better part of a month, but a rough draft comparison of the big bang and our quiet expansion is now on the web (https://81018.com/2016/06/01/quiet/).  It begins: “In September 2014 for the first time we publicly raised questions about the big bang theory”. Of course, Stephen Hawking has always been its biggest and best salesperson. He has become a rock star among scientists, especially with his current PBS-TV series, Genius, and the continued updating -and-capitalizing on his 1988, best-selling book, A Brief History of TimeIn 1973 he co-authored his first book about the the subject, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time.”

“Only a fool would dare challenge his work. So, such is life; each of us must at sometime play the fool. “

Much further down I say: “More than just the big bang theory’s (bbt) four forces of nature within the Planck scale, we assume a certain unification of all five Planck base units and those constants that define them, and that this unification is carried through the entire 201+ notations to the current time and present day (until proven to be otherwise). The Planck base units are defined by length, time, mass, temperature and charge. These Planck units are further defined by the speed of light (or special relativity), the gravitational constant (or general relativity), the reduced Planck constant (or ħ or quantum mechanics), the Coulomb constant (or ε0 or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or kB or of temperature).”

I wonder if you have any comments?

Thank you.

Most sincerely,
Bruce Camber

Second email: January 26, 2015, 12:01 PM

My dear Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking (and Jonathan Wood):

Steven Weinberg begins his book, “The First Three Minutes” at 1/100th of a second. He missed 136 doublings from the Planck Length and Planck Time (on the way to the Observable Universe-Age of Universe respectively).

Here is our chart of the two within 202 doublings.

The first 67 doublings involve the de facto structure that gives rise to space and time and may begin to deflate the Big Bang Theory as theory. In revisiting Einstein’s 1913 work, the hole argument (Stanford summary), spacetime is derivative of gravity. John Stachel has an even strong paper. History has missed each boundary condition from the Planck Length-Time to the outer limits, first defined by a simple continuity and symmetry within 3D tilings and tessellations that by that 67th doubling manifest more complexity than all the evolutionary thinking within CERN could possibly imagine. We may just find that Jane’s intuitions served her well. For me, I say that we must find a way to take Kepler one step further so we can begin to harmonize this little universe. Of course, I do not anticipate a response. We wish you and Prof. Dr. Steven Weinberg well.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

First email: August 3, 2014, 9:29 PM 

My dear Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking: 

I think our high school geometry classes, although very rough around the edges with major conceptual leaps, is closing in on a very real, elegant, simple model of the universe that involves base-2 exponential notations to define the boundary conditions from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe. It includes 3D tilings that begin with a tetrahedral-octahedral truss, then considers the parallel construct to music (and takes Kepler one step further so to harmonize within this little universe).  

You may enjoy it: https://81018.com/order/ Thanks.

Warmly,

Bruce