On following the work of Willy Fischler…

Willy Fischler, Weinberg Theory Group, University of Texas Austin, Austin, Texas

ArXiv: Why The Cosmological Constant is a Boundary Condition
CV: inSpire
Google Scholar Citations
Homepage Willy Fischler
Wikipedia
YouTube

Second email: 30 April 2022 at 6:24 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Willy Fischler:

I had great hope for the work of your theory group. You were actually down at the Planck scale asking questions. It’s only really been within the past twenty years that Planck scale got any respect. Its precursor, the Stoney scale, gets even less! Because of our history (hang-ups), our infinitesimal universe has been stuck within particle physics when there is so much mathematical physics between there and the Planck or Stoney scales. So, when our high school students opened the door on the 67 base-2 notations from the Planck scale to particle physics and quantum fluctuations, I asked many, “Is it meaningful?” Of course, everybody is too afraid to be wrong and is reluctant to answer. If it’s math, it’s math. If it’s geometry, it’s geometry. A base-2 progression from Planck scale would give Langlands, Witten, and you a lot of playing field. I discuss this a little on the current homepage: https://81018.com/ which is actually URL: https://81018.com/hypostatics/ I’ve seen a little activity on my “Fischler page” so went in an updated it a little. I hope you are well and doing fine.

Best wishes,

Bruce

First email: October 31, 2018, 2:43 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Willy Fischler:

Regarding motion at the Planck scale and your work on that NSF grant for String Theory and Quantum Field Theory: From the Planck Scale to the Hubble Scale,  I’ve particularly begun to follow your work with Tom Banks on holographic space-time and the initial conditions for inflation.

You and your people are today’s pioneers and quiet heroes. Congratulations on all that you have done. Of course, I thank you.

Before going further, let me assure you that I am a nobody from nowhere special and I have already stretched young minds in ways that may not be helpful, especially within their academic careers, so I continue my studies with great purpose-and-direction!

Long ago I had a chat with Weinberg in his office at Harvard while I was a graduate student at Boston University working on a project at MIT; and just yesterday, I came full-circle with his book, The First Three Minutes.

Perhaps I have missed the others, but it seems your article with Banks is the first to predict an early era of structure formation prior to the Big Bang. If you were to set aside the big bang thinking for a bit and enter the Leibniz-Boltzmann space of low entropy, where are we? I suspect in the Planck Epoch (a “Turok process“) with the Planck base units, and possibly we are witnessing the first, very-special sphere. That charge and inherent energies of light manifesting as space-time-and-mass, make for a very special moment that replicates over and over again, instantly creating a doubling and … the very simple beginning of inflation.

I am working through HST cosmology and FRW slices. Yet, in our simple sphere environment, we have 64 base-2 doublings within which to bring in all this very important conceptual work that is at the edges of my understanding.

As smart as Planck was, the wars and family were penultimate distractions. He could have applied base-2 to his Planck scale base units and found the 64 doublings before we could possibly begin to measure things. He could have found all 202 doublings to the current Age of the Universe but history obfuscated Planck’s work until Wilczek’s 2001 articles in Physics Today.

It appears that I have gone on too long. Please excuse me.

Again, congratulations on all your work. I hope that I have not wasted your time.

The long-and-short of it, perhaps you can tell me (and about 80 students) why base-2 cannot be applied to the Planck base units. Thanks again.

Most sincerely,
-Bruce

_____