TO: Dan Hooper, Fermi National Laboratory, Wilson Street and Kirk Road, Batavia IL 60510-5011
FM: Bruce E. Camber
RE: Your articles in ArXiv–Dan Hooper, especially your TASI Lectures on Indirect Searches For Dark Matter (PDF – 2018) and your homepage(s) — Chicago, DBpedia, inSPIRE^HEP, LinkedIN, Twitter, and Wikipedia; your
podcast: Why This Universe?, your publications: especially your books:
• Dark Cosmos: In Search of our Universe’s Missing Mass and Energy (2006)
• Nature’s Blueprint; Supersymmetry and the Search for a Unified Theory of Matter and Force (2008)
• At the Edge of Time: Exploring the Mysteries of Our Universe’s First Seconds (2019)
and your YouTube, especially On Time: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB7d89-YHjM) and your other videos (Ted^x Talk, Higgs Boson, 2012).

This page is: https://81018.com/hooper/ Other references within this website:
• https://81018.com/open-envelope/#1f
• https://81018.com/2020/06/29/early-universe/
• https://81018.com/validate/#4f

Fifth (most recent) email: 17 September 2024

Re: Your article in Astronomy, “Is the Big Bang in crisis?” Published: May 2020 Updated: May 2023

Dear Prof. Dr. Daniel Hooper:

It’s been awhile, but in light of your article
and the years of results from space telescopes
(especially JWST), and the long term open questions
and hyperbole, it is time for a serious look at all that
is exponential: https://81018.com/interdependencies/

Thank you.

Most sincerely,
Bruce

Fourth email: Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 10:34 AM

Dear Prof. Dr. Daniel Hooper:

The first moment in time… what does it look like? An infinitesimal sphere? Can we impute Smale and Milnor’s infinitesimal spheres for gravity and electromagnetism? Do they quickly become infinitesimal composites that are the indirect subjects of many robust disciplines that are not on the grid? Can it absorb the big bang?

I think you are aware from my prior notes to you that we used base-2 with the Planck’s natural units to map the universe in 202 notations. It was a creative plaything for several years as we asked around the world for critical comments. Nobody knew what to do with those numbers. In 2016 I got a bit more serious by launching the 81018 website and consolidating all our off-the-cuff blogs and questions strewn around free sites on the web. More recently, following the rather diverse history of pi (π), we’ve come to believe more and more in the concept that there are 64 base-2 notations where those infinitesimal spheres create the foundations that the particle zoo simply cannot.

Totally idiosyncratic, I know, but is it worthy of your time to comment? Thank you.

Warm regards,

Bruce

Third email: 31 January 2022 @ 4:30 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Daniel Hooper:

I was visiting with some of our high school kids and we began talking about the Planck base units. We did a little thought experiment and used those units as a starting point for the basic structures of the universe knowing full-well that we were orders of magnitude smaller than anything defined within the Standard Model for Particle Physics. So, we began at the Planck scale with infinitesimal first particles that stacked and packed. It charts out nicely.

Even though a thought experiment, do you know if such a scenario has been logically explored?

It seemed to us that just maybe we could find a Langlands programs expert and string/M theory person and pull them into our first 64 of the 202 notations (base-2 doublings). Yes, there are 64 doublings before the Higgs and the particle zoo. Do you know anybody who has ever considered it?

Thank you.
Most sincerely,

Bruce

Second email: Sun, May 30, 2021 at 3:10 PM

First email: 18 August 2020 @ 5:55 PM

You are a scholar’s scholar. I really don’t know how you do it all! Articles, books, teaching, public lectures,* holding two posts with all that administrative work, graduate students, doctoral dissertations… I am exhausted just looking over your shoulder!

Of your 227 articles in ArXiv, today I chose to read your singular work back in 2018, Life Versus Dark Energy. Earlier this month I began working through your collective work with 26 others, The First Three Seconds;  and because it’s a look from so many perspectives, it’s still quite open for discussion!

I posted an Open Letter to you and your co-authors and now that includes two direct references and links to you and your work:

• https://81018.com/open-envelope/
• https://81018.com/2020/06/29/early-universe/ 

If you would like me to add or delete anything, I am pleased to do so.

A few years ago I was disappointed to read that Max Planck said, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather… science advances one funeral at a time.” My hope is with the young. I’m 73. Notwithstanding,I don’t think Max Planck’s pessimism is well-placed. I think all of us can always be learning something new and even profound.

Now, I’ve backed into my studies of cosmology. Nine years ago, I was helping my nephew by taking his high school geometry classes (5) inside a tetrahedron!  We used Zeno’s logic, dividing the edges in half, and kept going right back to Planck’s base units. It has been nine years now. Somewhere back near the beginning I started thinking that Lemaître’s cold start theory from 1927 should be examined more closely. The logic seemed to be pointing in that direction. Ever-so-slowly I am learning about our deep-seated biases about the very nature of time, the place of geometries, exponentiation, and, of course, Tegmark’s infinity…

I think we all have a ways to go before we finish! 

Thank you for your scholarship! I wish you well.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

*Listening to your RI lecture on 10 February 2020. Great fun.  Nice confession at 26:42. “…you might be under the impression that we really understand a lot about our universe’s first fraction of a second…”  Thank you.

PS. I continue to struggle with these issues on every new top-level post a/k/a homepage, which remains for just a month, a week or even just a day: https://81018.com/just-a-second/  –BEC

_____