First email: Tuesday, September 25, 2018, 3:28 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Juan Maldacena:
Is it reasonable to consider Max Planck’s simple definition of time when we talk about the interior of the space-time?
Planck’s more simple formulation computes well with the experimental results. And, of course, if we were to apply base-2 notation to Planck Time, there would be a small variable as each quantity is multiplied by 2. It appears to remain within 1% throughout all 202 notations from Planck Time to the current time or age of the universe.
By inserting of the other base units along this scale of the universe, the data sets become more challenging, yet the simple correspondence between length and time tells a profound story. The correspondence with mass and charge, though stretching the imagination, still retains a deep logic and continuity.
Might you comment? Just nonsense?
PS. This work started in a New Orleans high school geometry class where we chased Zeno’s paradox to the Planck Wall and then asked, “What else can we do?”
Related links: https://81018.com/c/
Chart of numbers: https://81018.com/chart/ (see line 10)
A little background story: https://81018.com/home