by Bruce Camber Initiated: December 6, 2017

Some numbers and equations define our universe more fundamentally than others.

Many people throughout the world recognize this simple equation that changed history:

e=mc²

Einstein  (14 March 1879 – 18 April 1955): The mass-energy equivalence was first postulated in 1905.  Max Planck, then editor of a most prestigious scientific journal in Berlin, recognized Einstein’s fundamental insights and invited him to visit. Of course, the rest is history. Yet, it was Max Planck who between 1899 and 1905 postulated the Planck base units and this formula for Planck Time:

Max Planck (23 April 1858 – 4 October 1947):  The first equivalency of that formula tells us that light (c)  is equal to Planck Length divided by Planck Time, and here we see something about light that has not been discussed by the scholarly community. Light pervades the universe within every notation and therefore we have been too focused on the spectrum on either side of visible light and have missed an essential part of its nature that has not been explored, especially from Notations 1 to 67.

Another equation that could readily challenge Einstein’s formula comes out of our early history.

Archimedes (circa 287-212 BC}:  The volume of any perfect sphere has been with us for millennium but it is understudied and undervalued.
.
This formula and all other formulas related to the circle are postulated to be the first to establish the physical universe, not as a big bang, but as a quiet expansion. In November 2017 an analysis of the notations, beginning with the first notations, began in earnest. An index of the 202 notations also began.

Leonhard Euler (15 April 1707 – 18 September 1783): To date this very special equation defines exponential notation and it has been recognized and widely used by scholars within physics, chemistry, engineering, mathematical biology, and economics.

The equation is touted for its beauty and elegance. Exponential notation, however, has not yet been recognized as a defining formula for the nature of the universe.
.
Our simple chart hints that maybe it is.  From all our work since December 2011, it appears to be a nascent conclusion.  If this universe is an exponential universe, that is, if the simple chart of numbers from the Planck Time to the Age of the Universe is taken as given, there will be a lot of philosophy, psychology, physics and cosmology to be more deeply studied. Even issues within ethics can be re-addressed.

For more:

• Index
• Table of Content
• Our December 19, 2017 celebrations
• Letters to Euler experts (to come)