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

Licata, Ignazio

Ignazio Licata, Director
Institute for Scientific Methodology (ISEM)
School of Advanced International Studies
on Applied Theoretical and non Linear Methodologies of Physics

Palermo, Sicily, Italy

Articles & Books: Vision of Oneness, Aracne
Physics of Emergence and Organization
Wikipedia: “Licata has studied with David Bohm, Jean-Pierre Vigier…”
YouTube  (in Italian)

First email: 20 February 2018

Dear Prof.Dr. Ignazio Licata:

I am not sure how many people have David Bohm and J.P. Vigier in common, yet when I saw their names so prominent in your Wikipedia listing and within your CV, it brought back pleasant memories (1977 & 1980) and encouraged further reading.

Then I saw this link: Ignazio Licata: Universe without singularities. A group approach to de Sitter cosmology, EJTP, Vol. 3 (2006), pp. 211-224 It is now on my active reading-study list initiated on ArXiv.

Having looked ahead to your most recent 4-index theory of gravity… I know your work will bring me quickly to the edges of my insights and knowledge, but people like you are rare indeed. I apologize if it appears that I am being frivolous with your time. I simply wanted to thank you for doing what you do!

Thank you and best wishes,
Most sincerely,
Bruce Camber
Austin, Texas

What is infinite? In 1925, the great mathematician, David Hilbert wrote, “We have already seen that the infinite is nowhere to be found in reality, no matter what experiences, observations, and knowledge are appealed to.” Many scholars would agree even today. Maybe Hilbert and those scholars are mistaken. There are many non-ending and non-repeating numbers such as pi, Euler’s equation (e), and all the other dimensionless constants. Aren’t these numbers evidence or a manifestation of the infinite within the finite?

Yes, I believe access to the infinite is found in the primary dimensionless constants where the number being generated does not end and does not repeat. There are 26-to-31 such numbers that have been associated by John Baez, Frank Wilczek, and others to be necessarily part of the definition of the Standard Model of Particle Physics. There are over another 300 such numbers defined by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). All are dimensionless constants that seemingly never-end and never-repeat. And, then there is Simon Plouffe; he has identified, through algorithmic programming, 11.3 billion mathematical constants (as of August 2017) which includes pi, Euler’s number, and more. This use of “never-ending, never-repeating” as the entry to the infinite will be challenged. If it can be defended, then there are more connections betweeen the finite and infinite than David Hilbert and most scholars had ever anticipated. More…

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