- 2015: Elementary particle classification, Physics Foundations Society, 2015
- 2015: Fundamental Concepts − from Force to Energy (Tuomo Suntola, Ari Lehto,Tarja Kallio-Tamminen, Heikki Sipilä), March 2015
- 2014: Conference Article: Period-Doubling As A Structure Creating Natural Process, 2014, PDF (See pages 91-115)
- 2009: Conference Article: On the Planck Scale and Structures of Matter, Natural Philosophy Alliance Proceedings (NPA), May 25-29, 2009 PDF ( Presentation slides PDF )
- 2008: On the Planck Scale and properties of matter (Research Gate, 2014), DOI: 10.11648/j.ijass.s.2014020601.17
- 2006: ArXiv: Quantization of Keplerian systems:
- 1990: (PDF) Periodic time and the stationary properties of matter, Chinese Journal of Physics, 1990
Most recent email: 16 November 2019 @ 4:31 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Ari Lehto: –
I am copying your friend and colleague given you work so closely
together. You know that I am very excited about your work on
period doubling. It seems you can help us all substantially
to understand the machinations at the Planck scale.
That in our last touchpoint, you indicated that you still hold to Isaac Newton’s absolute space and time, I began ruminating about his Principia and
the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence.
That resulted in this new homepage: https://81018.com/bridge/ It is still undergoing some serious editing, but it is far enough along to get the general idea.
Now I have been asking scholars since 2011 to kick my butt back into reality, and you are the only one (with your last note to me) who has really started to wrestle with our eight-year legacy with pointed comments.
I’ll be going over your points and then over them again and again just to
be sure that I understand and address each point fairly. Please consider
this my first attempt to think through Newton’s absolutes.
Third email: September 18, 2019 @3 PM
RE: Simple Formulas. Big Bang Cosmology Obfuscates Deeper Studies
Dear Prof. Dr. Ari Lehto:
I get so little feedback, I thank you for taking your time with that page.
Now, I’ve lifted out some part of each of your comments to display;
however, your entire comment has been the subject of my reflections.
The length of a second cannot be measured uniquely…
First, I must ask, “Can we consider our universe as a whole?”
Then, “Can we consider the smallest possible parts of our universe?”
Also, do you still hold Newton’s absolute space and time?
Taking the entire universe, could a second of time be determined
by Planck Time? In my simple calculations, it is between
notation 143 and 144. Does that simple logic fail?
Dark energy has not been observed…
Yes, it has been enigmatic for over a century. What if it is simply
below the time and length scales that we can measure? Does
it all begin at some definition of the smallest possible units of X, Y,
Yes, that flies in the face of big bang cosmology. But, our
naturally-inflating universe encapsulates the epochs of the big bang.
Of course, I started with what I thought were accepted Planck
base units. Can we can start with just Planck Time? Can we then
assume that there are other facets that can be defined such that
there is consensus among the many? Can we assume a natural
inflation (period doubling or sphere stacking or …)? If so, then there
are 84 Planck Time doublings (notations) that cannot be measured.
If the currently accepted value for Planck Length is taken as a given,
there are about 64 or 65 notations that are below the CERN
Do those conclusions hold any water?
The Planck length is fairly inaccurate…
My simple logic says, “Start with something. If it works, it works. If it doesn’t
let’s see why not.
If you divide the given Planck Length by Planck Time, it is
ostensibly equal to the speed of light. https://81018.com/chart/
That seems significant and it has not been discussed in “the literature.”
Perhaps considered trivial, I rather think not. It was fun to uncover.
When we took samplings of the values along the 202 notations (all the
doublings of Planck Length and Planck Time), those calculations all fell
within .125% of the speed of light in a vacuum. Yes, of course, math is math!
Still, isn’t that all worth looking at a little further?
Speed of light… Interpretation is theory dependent.
You are so right, but a series of questions nudge me:
What is math? What are dimensionless constants? What is pi?
Can we have a theory-independent model that is just simple math
and dimensionless constants?
And, finally, might you help me further with your final comment:
The system degrees of freedom bring about fine structure
to the period doubling cascade (cube and fourth roots).
Second email: July 16, 2019
Dear Prof. Dr. Ari Lehto:
What a joy to discover your work today.
There is somebody else who has been down this path!
But… you were out there on your own in 2006!
What has happened since that time?
I am catching up with your work today, rather circumstantially
bumped into as a result of searching for anybody who may have
referred to the work of Diego Meschini and his supervisor,
Dr. Markku Lehto.
I just thought you would want to know!
Thank you for your scholarship, “One such process is
period doubling, a common property of non-linear
After I have digested more, may I ask a few questions?
First email: July 15, 2019 (bounced back)
Dear Prof. Dr. Ari Lehto:
I have been dreaming about finding papers like yours for seven years!
Wow, wow, wow. Thank you.
My reference notes taken from your work (Ari Lehto):
PhD in Physics (1978), discovered that the period doubling mechanism, a universal property of nonlinear dynamical systems, governs the buildup of structures from the intrinsic properties of the elementary particles to the large scale systems with cosmological dimensions.
“The mechanism that indicates a high degree of order in nature is not a part of the prevailing theories but it could give a major contribution to our understanding of the physical reality and the origin of the invariant properties and structures of matter.”
Professor emeritus Ari Lehto has had both industrial and academic careers; he has invented of micro devices and their related manufacturing technologies.