Hattie is right…

Highlighted ArrowCENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITYSYMMETRYHARMONY GOALS•June.2019
HOMEPAGES: ASSUMPTIONS|DARK | EMERGENCE|INFINITE|Inflation | KEYS|REVIEW|STEM|Spher
Cain-Cormon-700x300
Our distraught world may have progressed beyond Cain’s tortured and barren life,
yet Cormon’s work captures a metaphorical reality of our own desperate world.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

We’ve Been Wrong About so Many Things*

by Bruce Camber .Personal Notes: This page is for my wife and friends who all want to know how the world would be different if we were to embrace “An Integrated Structure of the Universe” (prior homepage). Though speculative, it seems that logic and mathematics are better starting points than complexity. Also, simplicity helps to explain our universe more deeply and richly.

We ignore the entire universe at our peril. My wife’s name is Hattie. She is like many people who have very little patience with formal logic and equations. That impatience is good! Scientists and scholars make claims as if it is the rock-solid truth. When others concur, that “truth” seemingly becomes our reality. But Hattie challenges us, “What? Can you say that more clearly?”

Take the classic formula, e=mc2. Everybody recognizes Einstein’s “simple” equation. Some think they understand it. Yet, some scholars make us feel like stupid because we honestly say, “I don’t get it.” Most of my best friends say something like that. We don’t get it because science doesn’t really get it either. There are big gaps in scientific knowledge.

People like Hattie are asking science to be more humble and acknowledge those gaps.

Even the best of our scientists do not think of the entire universe when thinking about the question, “What is the really real“? Without an image of that universe, we cannot, and will not, understand e=mc2 and equations like it.

e=mc2 Who truly understands energy (e)? Who grasps the essence of mass (m)? From where does that speed of light (c) come?  The best physicists, philosophers, scientists, and scholars are debating it all today. And, they have been debating it all throughout our ever-so-brief time as a people who record our history.

The universe is challenging us. It is trying to give us a larger perspective. It is trying to teach us all not to be so small. If you have been to this website in the past, you know it is a focus on the 202 base-2 notations from the Planck units1  to the current age and size of the universe. When we make the universe our focus and we begin to think of everything in light of the entire universe and from the beginning of time (essentially those 202 mathematically-integrated notations), many of our mysteries will be more approachable and perhaps even you will have new, original insights about it all.

Science is our creation. The universe is not. And, we all make mistakes. Making mistakes seems to be the very essence of life and surely, the essence of science.

Science is all about facts and guesses. When we make a guess, we have to figure out how to test it to discover in what ways we are right or wrong. Then, we make another approximation, an informed guess, until we think we are close to what seems to be the truth. Yet, there are many concepts that get sticky, seasoned with age and attitude. And like all other humans, scientists and scholars fall in love with their ideas and build special barriers around them, a definitive circle of influence; and predictably, turf wars break out.

In 1716 Isaac Newton2 of England was fighting for the veracity of a bad idea. He was arguing with Gottfried Leibniz of Germany and Leibniz lost that battle — he died — and the world was stuck with Newton’s absolute space and time. Look up into the clear night sky, somebody says, “It goes on forever,” and most of us concur. That’s Newton’s absolute space and time. It’s wrong. It only goes as far as the current expansion. On the other side of that expansion is infinity. And, you can’t get there today.

Though Newton’s concept is not the correct one, we have struggled to know what is.

Alternatives. Science has had it wrong, and they’ve known it for at least 100 years. Einstein made that sort of clear. But, nobody came up with an alternative that people could understand. Nobody… so Newton’s old concept of absolute space and time continued to stand as our commonsense  worldview. The problem is, to grasp who we are, where we came from, and the meaning and value of life, we need such an alternative and it just may be deep within a mathematically-integrated, logically-consistent, UniverseView.

Newton’s concept has had unintended consequences; it’s high time to wake up out of that dogmatic slumber!

Waking up is hard to do. In 1899 Max Planck, following in the footsteps of George Johnstone Stoney, came up with what are now known as Planck’s basic units.3  He apparently got too busy with other things and ignored his own work. First, there was his definition of a quanta of energy.  That earned him a Nobel prize in 1918.  As the  most-revered scientist of Germany, he was constantly being sidetracked by Germany’s aggressive behaviors that opened up World War I & II. 

The bigger truth, however, is, “It is very hard to sell a new idea.”  There were many new concepts emerging in this period of our scientific endeavors and everybody ignored Planck’s base units. It took over a 100 years before their importance was truly recognized. In 2001 Frank Wilczek 4 of MIT and a Nobel laureate himself (2004), asked us all to pay attention; and, slowly we did. But, it was already too late for cosmology, string theory,  and theoretical physics. Absolute time is hanging out in the background of their equations and those equations have had a stranglehold on new conceptual development.

First, we’ve missed a huge chasm of information between the Planck base units and today’s understanding of particles, waves, and fluctuations. And, also, our definitions of space, time, mass and charge have largely remained static.

The most basic, the most simple, the most fundamental units of a length and time. Although derived from what seem to be universal numbers, even today most scientists and scholars have not studied the Planck base units. So small is Planck Length and Planck Time, scientists and scholars easily ignore them. Yet, if we were to take as a given that these numbers represent the smallest possible numbers of space and time, doesn’t it logically follow, that this has to be the beginning of space and time?

I say that it is the only possible starting place (not a point).  To begin to get a sense of these numbers, like a child, we should begin to play with them. Doubling them is easy. So, that’s what we did. Then by doubling each result, over and over again, we discovered strains of solid gold. 

Doubling is a natural process and there are many mechanisms for doublings that are known, understood, and studied. One that does not have a necessary size requirement has a name, cubic-close packing of equal spheres. That Johannes Kepler, author of Harmonices Mundi 5 (1619), initiated a formal study of it creates a special symmetry.

HillsideSingers
1971, the Hillside Singers, outside Rome: “I’d like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.”

A New Container for the Universe.  In just 202 doublings 6 we are out to the approximate age and size of our universe, and the gross estimate for the total mass and total charge within our universe.

That’s a container that I think is well-worth the time to explore further!

The first 64 doublings: A Hypostatic Domain 8 Too small for any possible measurements — our tools are much too big — yet, here we discover a huge, undisclosed domain —  64 base-2 notations 9 (or containers, clusters, domains, doublings, groups, layers, sets and/or steps). Climbing up those steps is not easy. The next step is always twice as large. Seemingly begging our scientists and mathematicians, our universe easily demonstrates that there are many continuity equations that have been overlooked. Her model for sphere stacking opens a multitude of symmetry values that have yet to be studied. Here, well before anything can get chaotic, there are many potential dynamics that will create harmonies within the spheres.

We have ignore a most important part of our universe.  I hope to change that. We all need to discover and learn about the domain that stands under all other domains.

Without knowing about this hypostatic domain, we are left with the best physics can give us today and that is a world fraught with chaos. And, this is where physics is currently stuck. We do not understand quantum fluctuations. We do not understand the nature of of the mind. Within science today, the universe is probabilistic, not deterministic. And, quantum fluctuations have no cause per se and the universe is inherently unstable. Yes, we’ve inherited that manifest destiny of Cain 10, seeking refuge from his worst ideas and actions, seeking some stability and peace.

Getting under the chaos: Grasping the essence of our first 64 notations. Here is a starting place for a deeper understanding of who we are.  Here is an access path to the music of the spheres. Here we can begin to engage the power of prime numbers for uniqueness and creativity. Here we find a substrate of basic strings to make our particles and waves. Here we can develop a fully-integrated, unified theory of mathematics. Here we’ll find even more of the operating principles for the universe and we’ll begin to hear the deep-seated harmonies of the spheres again.

The future is Now.  I’ll stick my neck out. Not only will we have an integrated theory of mathematics, that will become the foundation for an integrated Standard Model for Physics and Cosmology.  We will first learn how to control bonding and there will never be a shortage of water again. We’ll learn how to control every possible acceleration and there will be an abundance of energy and the elimination of all cancers.  We’ll learn how to control gravity and no longer be limited to planetary systems. We will learn about the unity of time, and begin to understand that death is no more.  We’ll learn to navigate all 202 notations and no longer be limited to any one.

Bold, crazy, speculative, naive and silly could describe that prior paragraph. We’ll see!

WORK IN PROGRESS.

Projected release as a working draft, June 15, 2019

More to come…

Endnotes, Footnotes, References and Resources

Fernand Cormon (1845-1924) This image is a permanent part of the collections at the Muse d’Orsay in Paris. It is usually part of the permanent exhibition.


* We’ve Been Wrong About so Many Things We know Hitler was wrong. But are we as sure that Sir Isaac Newton was wrong about absolute space and time?

Galileo was right and the Church was wrong


202 base-2 notations from the Planck units1


2  1716 Isaac Newton.  Isaac Newton (1642-1727) published his major work, Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, in 1687. He was knighted in 1703. He became the president of the Royal Society in 1704. His acumen was not disputed. Yet, in an indirect dispute captured in what is known as the Leibniz–Clarke Correspondence  where reaffirmed his belief in absolute space and time.


3  Planck’s basic units. In 1881 George Johnstone Stoney had defined basic units and in 1899 Max Planck followed in those footsteps. Nobody thought too much more about these units defined by dimensionless constants. Yet, with those definitions was a new definition of the speed of light: https://81018.com/c/  It should have rocked the world. Here were new continuity equations that stretched across the universe.


4  Frank Wilczek


5  Harmonices Mundi (1619), initiated a formal study    Harmonices Mundi


6  202 doublings


7  The first 64 doublings


 8 Hypostatic Domain    Hypostatic Domain


 9  64 base-2 notations


10 Manifest destiny of Cain,

The Universe Is Trying to Teach Us: Long before science is able to justify particular concepts, science fiction writers and other creative artists,  give us a sense of the future. The 1971 pop culture song by Coca-Cola, “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing In Perfect Harmony” had a sense that there is such a thing as perfect harmony. It is a common phenomena among musicians to feel special moments of what they might call “perfect harmony.” There are what we call “transcendental moments”  and within this article, an aim is to bring this concept of the possibilities of perfect harmony alive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27d_Like_to_Teach_the_World_to_Sing_(In_Perfect_Harmony)

###