ArXiv(15): The Implications of N = 2 Supergravity Cosmology… (2022),
• Brane-Worlds and the Calabi-Yau Complex Structure Moduli (PDF), 2020
Books: Covariant Physics: From Classical Mechanics to General Relativity and Beyond, OUP, 2021,
• Are we there yet? The search for a Theory of Everything, Bentham Science Publishers, 2011
Homepage(s): inSPIREHEP, LinkedIN
Wikipedia: Big Bang. See under History/Etymology, footnote 53.
YouTube: Superstrings, Multiverses & The Future Of Physics, 2020; Rolling The Stones: The Hunt for the Building Blocks of Nature, Emam collection, TEDx Zewail City, Egypt. 2019
Most recent email: 1 October 2022 at 10 AM
Dear Prof. Dr. Moataz Emam:
I have enjoyed getting to know you and your work a little better through your videos and most-recent ArXiv articles. As a result, I have updated this page and I am certainly open to any suggestions to improve it further. Although long ago I had worked with some of our finest physicists, my core work has been outside of physics and mathematics. I have to go slowly and read things over several times before proceeding. Plus, in 2011, I unwittingly adopted an unusual perspective.
Working with high school geometry students, we mathematically and geometrically mapped and tiled and tessellated the universe within 202 base-2 notations from the Planck-base units to the current expansion. We thought it was a fascinating STEM tool, but nobody has gotten too excited about it because we didn’t find the big bang anywhere in our numbers! We have a very rapid expansion and a very natural inflation, but it comes from the nature of Planck’s natural units. In 1874 George Stoney made the first such computations; though slightly different, they essentially do the same thing.
I wish you well with your work and students and your adoring public!
First email: 17 January 2022 at 8:52 AM Articles
RE: Now how am I going to explain this — Covariant Physics — to all the grandchildren?
Dear Prof. Dr. Moataz Emam:
On my desktop, as I am writing to you, is one page of the OUP overview of your Covariant book, on another is Amazon’s “look inside.” And, on yet another page there is the listing of 3794 references within inSPIREHEP to covariant physics. I also usually take a quick look at the topic treatment by Wikipedia. Then, I ask myself, “Now how am I going to explain this for all the grandchildren?” I especially ask the question in light of all your more recent ArXiv entities!
Might we use geometrical and numerical metaphors?
For example, there are continuity equations from Planck Time to the current time that use base-2 to find just 202 doublings which are readily contained on one chart. It also provides a sequence of embedded geometries that begin with sphere stacking and emerge with the basic Platonic solids so the kids can follow both a numerical and geometric progression. If all those numbers and geometries are surrounded by a redefinition of infinity whereby there are corners and faces that are dynamically involved with its continuity-symmetry-harmony, there’s a chance the kids will begin to get it. When they begin to get it, the foundations of physics will open up.
They’ll have those visuals to help.
I know such simple surroundings may make things difficult later, at least the kids just might engage the subject more deeply than we have, and just maybe they will finally come up with new insights.
Thanks for all that you do and are doing. Congratulations on OUP’s engagement with you. Just marvelous.
PS. These images and this container give us new boundaries within which to work yet do not change any of the math from Einstein, Planck, Schwarzschild, to Langlands and Witten, and so many others to this day. Everything still works. There are simple connections. We’ll just see why it all works a little better. -BEC
PPS. Perhaps we should start a Wikipedia entry just about you! -B
Last update: October 1, 2022