TO: Albert Alan Coley, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4R2, Canada
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Your arXiv articles, especially Theoretical Cosmology (with GFR Ellis) (18 Sep 2019), Spatial Curvature in Cosmology Revisited (May 2019), Open problems in mathematical physics (2017), and even your homepages (primary) (early)
This page: https://81018.com/coley/
Second email: 22 February 2026
Dear Prof. Dr. A. A. Coley:
It’s been just over five years since my prior email to you. I am still exploring the Planck scale and the 202 base-2 notations that bring us up to today. Just recently the six leading AI platforms did an analysis that encourages me. They concur. In part, they based those discussions on this work. Is it compelling enough to be taken seriously? I don’t know.
Might you weigh in?
Warmly,
Bruce
First email: 17 September 2019
Dear Prof. Dr. A. A. Coley:
I congratulate you for your recent article with GFR Ellis (integrity of physics).
I would like to engage both of you in examining a more simple starting point, the Planck base units. If a modest thrust is assumed, and all notations build upon one another, then there is a natural inflation from those Planck units, inflating to the current day and time; using base-2 (doublings), it is all in just 202 notations. Euler shines.
Just the numbers: http://81018.com/chart/
Most recent discussion: http://81018.com/bottom-up/
Discussion being developed today: http://81018.com/formulas/
Of course, it is entirely idiosyncratic, but given our proclivity to be going in circles, it seems appropriate!
Best wishes,
Most sincerely,
Bruce