Articles: Is the Universe a Giant Loop?, Rafi Letzter, LiveScience, November 5, 2019
ArXiv; Cosmic Discordance: Planck and luminosity distance data exclude LCDM, 2020
YouTube: Constraining fundamental physics with the CMB (2011)
Second email: 27 April 2022 at 6 PM
Dear Prof. Dr. Alessandro Melchiorri:
I was among those who were challenged by your 2019 Opened/Closed article. It seemed like commonsense. Of course, the universe was opened.
Three years later, we have nothing conclusive, so might I suggest that we try to start again from scratch? Where would you begin? Don’t we all are need a paradigm shift? How about this for a start:
1. Might we assume infinitesimal units on the order of Planck/Stoney define the first moment in time?
2. Might we assume that one infinitesimal sphere manifests per infinitesimal unit of time?
3. If so, we can readily assume between 539-to-4609 tredecillion spheres per second.
4. If so, assume both attractor theory and the Fourier transform have key roles.
5. If so, assume Langlands programs and string-and-M theory have key roles.
Might we have the making of an ALT model of the universe that James Peebles could participate in?
First email to this group: November 2019
Editor’s note: In what ways could our base-2 chart be a closed system? It seems quite open and evolving. I’ll be going over this email quite a few more times to try to discern, Open? or CLOSED? -Bruce
Dear Prof. Dr. Alessandro Melchiorri (Corresponding Author),
(and Prof. Dr. Eleonora Di Valentino and Prof. Dr. Joseph Silk):
There should be no crisis for cosmology!
We all want to live within the best possible understandings of our actual reality. I’ve had to ask, “Could a closed-universe model be created by starting with Planck Time, Planck Length, Planck Mass and Planck charge? If we apply base-2, encapsulating the universe within 202 exponential notations that start at the very first moment of space and time and goes to the current age-and-size of the Universe, it is not closed. The Now is still happening, evolving, unfolding from a finite-infinite relation. In this model that relation is dynamic, always-current, and it is defined within pi. It may not satisfy some people’s need for a more robust sense of the infinite, these definitions go as far as we need to go at this point in time.
This work comes out of a high school so I apologize for any errors. Also, we did a comparison of that progression of numbers with the definition of the Big Bang epochs within the standard model: https://81018.com/calculations/ It seems to compare well.
Might we have our cake and eat it, too? Of course, we’ll need adopt the Rovelli camp (along with Richard Muller of Berkeley and others) and finally grasp a new understanding of our illusion of time’s arrow.
Thank you for all your work. Congratulations. Brilliant!
Planck evidence for a closed Universe and a possible crisis for cosmology
Nat Astron (2019) doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0906-9
“Planck cosmic microwave background spectra now preferring a positive curvature at more than the 99% confidence level. Here, we further investigate the evidence for a closed Universe from Planck, showing that positive curvature naturally explains the anomalous lensing amplitude, and demonstrating that it also removes a well-known tension in the Planck dataset concerning the values of cosmological parameters derived at different angular scales.“