###### CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY • USA • GOALS•July 2018

HOMEPAGES: JUST PRIOR|Measure|BBT|Growth|Imagine|Einstein|ORIGINAL

###### 72 OF 202: GRID of EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE FOR ALL TIME – NOT A THEORY OR VISION – JUST MATH.

# 202 Doublings of the Planck Base Units

##### BY BRUCE CAMBER

**Within the prior homepage (July 2018)** twelve basic concepts were deemed to be necessary elements and functions to generate the initial numbers that become the 202 doublings from the Planck base units to the age and size of universe. Although the words used to capture those twelve concepts have been part of scholarly analysis, the conceptual integration of those words for that article, for now, appears to be unique.

**If unique, it is only because our world’s scholars and scientists have been too conscribed by both Standard Models, the one for particles and the other for cosmology, to engage this rather basic level of simplicity**.

“* Does every kind of mathematics, geometry and logic build upon itself?*” Within another homepage, one from June 2018, that question was asked. We know that the entire universe can be mathematically integrated by just 202 doublings of the Planck base units. That special application of base-2 exponentiation is a natural inflation, a

*Quiet Expansion*from the beginning of time to this very day and time. Within this construct, ideas and concepts can be more readily judged to be precepts (rules or principles) that are either primordial or not.

With an earlier homepage (January 2016), this “precept construction project” had begun in earnest. Another key question was asked: *What is the most simple and foundational number among all numbers?*

Many scholars have taken up that challenge. Their concepts and first principles have become my building blocks… gifts from Pythagoras to Plato, from Martin Rees, John Barrow, Roger Penrose, and James Stein to so many others.

Yet, the two most-luminous Standard Models are well-removed from our 202 doublings. Very few of our most-distinguished scholars have wrestled with this simple mathematical model because it is primarily of the very early universe (Notations 1-197 and the first 363 million years) where very little is known because the Big Bang theory has blocked our view and limited our creative engagements. When the big bang is considered the key part of the beginning, everyone gets confused. There has to be a convergence of too many things and variables within what appears to be too small a space at too hot a temperature. Within our simple model, this very small space is considered Notations 65, 66, and 67. Each is twice as large as the prior. And, giving our scholars even more breathing room, there are the preceding 64 notations (doublings or steps or discrete groups) down to the Planck base units.

Once the outlines of this model are considered *worth the time to explore*, I truly believe that a new day could dawn in the sciences.

**So, let’s either debunk those 64 or subject them to unmerciful testing**. There are literally millions of formulas with which to work. Either they work together or they don’t. My bet is that they do work together and this site is ready to encourage the best of the best to test these numbers. Thank you.

**Questions from homepages from which those compilations have come**:

**Shall we revisit our structure for scientific revolutions?****Can these concepts be tested using rather simple formulas?****Does measurement qua measurement actually begin with pure math and logic?****Is “infinitely-hot, infinitely-dense, infinitely-small” the wrong place to start?****What is the deep nature of growth?****Are our imaginations working overtime?****What is an inertial frame of reference in light of 202 notations?****Are some concepts first principles”?****Can Turok, Arkani-Hamed and Tegmark open up new conceptual frames of reference?****What is pi that we are mindful of it?****Ask the penultimate questions: What is finite? What is infinite?****Are we asking enough “what if” questions?****Who is on our team? To whom do we turn?****What has been the driving vision?****What is the fabric of the universe?****Are there rules for our roads? What are they?****Is the universe exponential? Is Euler’s identity spot on?****Is this model built on something even faster than exascale computing?****Does the universe go on forever or just as far as the current expansion?****Is there a better way to keep track of all these writings?****Who among us is really and truly in a dialogue with the universe?****Why? Then as a child, ask the question again, Why? And again, ask****, “Why?”****Have there been summaries of these ideas? What have we missed?****Are the 202 doublings still a virtually unexplored area for research?****The arrogance of language: How do we know what we know and don’t know?****What are the most important qualities of infinity?****Does this original homepage anticipate the future?**