19 July 1938 – 20 May 2025
Jayant quoting Nehru,
“Science gives a doubting and hesitating reply, for it is of the nature of science not to dogmatize, but to experiment and reason and rely on the mind of man. I need hardly tell you that my preferences are all for science and the methods of science.”
Jayant V. Narlikar, Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics,
Ganeshkhind, Pune 411 007, India
Articles: Autobiography, ArXiv: Biography, Books: Facts and Speculations in Cosmology, with G. Burbridge, Cambridge University Press 2008
Homepage(s): CV/Publications, IUCAA page, Google Scholar, inSPIREHEP, X-tweets, Wikipedia
YouTube: 36:53 Question and Answer session on Astronomy, IISER Pune, Jul 13, 2020
43:52 Giant of Cosmology! by Dr Brian Keating about Jayant Narlikar
1:04:27 How well do we know our universe? Sep 10, 2019
17:50 A New Perspective to Look at the Mystery of Beginning! TEDx Talks, Sep 23, 2019
Strengths and weaknesses of the big bang cosmology, ASI Bulletin (ISSN 0304-9523), March 1992
Fourth email: 19 February 2025
Dear Prof. Dr. Jayant Narlilkar:
From a radically different perspective Strengths and weaknesses of the big bang cosmology, my nascent model was engaged by Grok and ChatGPT. I thought you might appreciate seeing both:
- https://81018.com/chatgpt-2/
- https://81018.com/grok24/
- https://81018.com/quiet-expansion/
- https://81018.com/essence/
Be well.
With warm regards,
Bruce
Third email: 2 October 2024
RE: I assume emails get buried and are unread.
Dear Prof. Dr. Jayant Narlilkar:
You have been trying to be convincing at least since 1992 with your lecture and publication of Strengths and weaknesses of the big bang cosmology.
So, I believe there is a conceptual conundrum. We haven’t been radical enough and concise enough to be compelling. I’ll be trying today with the release of my basic hypotheses about the Planck scale: https://81018.com/infinitesimals/#Emails
Being a nobody from nowhere special, I am easy to ignore. But, I haven’t been shot down in the past ten years; maybe that says something!
I invite your comments and corrections: https://81018.com/narlikar
And, I offer prayers for your good health and that of your families’ families.
Warmly,
Bruce
PS The eight hypotheses of the Planck scales in today’s new article:
- The Planck units define an infinitesimal sphere.
- Spheres at the Planck scale define a perfection.
- Perfection is defined by the continuity-symmetry-harmony within pi(π).
- The universe is tiled and tessellated by Planck spheres.
- A grid of Planck-scale spheres define the infinitesimal universe.
- Planck-scale physics and mathematics are defined by pi(π).
- Continuity-symmetry-and-harmony of pi (π) render the homogeneous and isotropic.
- There are geometries of imperfection.
All eight hypotheses are linked to one of our pages where the discussion has been opened. As a result of this article either those pages will be further developed or a new page will be started to focus on just that hypothesis alone.
Second email: 3 March 2021
My dear Prof. Dr. Jayant Vishnu Narlikar:
Over six years ago, I sent my first email which I include just below
(albeit updated). I thought you might enjoy seeing two new pages:
1. Our research page about you: http://81018.com/Narlikar/
2. My latest thinking (always the homepage): http://81018.com
For Pi Day on March 14: https://81018.com/challenge/
Most sincerely,
Bruce
PS. Can we open up the front end of the Standard Model
with data sets from the Planck Base Units?
If yes, might we assume, as a thought experiment:
1. Those Planck base units manifest as a basic building block
and that building block is spherical.
2. This spherical building block manifests the qualities of pi and cubic-close packing of equal spheres and the Fourier Transform.
3. Planck Time defines a rate of expansion and dynamic labeling. The rate by which those building blocks emerge is 539.11 tredecillion units per second.
4. Can we begin thinking anew about the aether, dark energy and dark matter, and the basis of homogeneity and isotropy? Thanks. -BEC
First email: Sun, January 18, 2015 at 12:35 PM
My dear Prof. Dr. Jayant Vishnu Narlikar:
I wrote an article, “Did a Quiet Expansion precede the Big Bang (or does that Quiet Expansion
deflate the Big Bang)?” It originated out of some simple work with base-2 notation from the
Planck Length to the Observable Universe which later led to the same scale for Planck Time
to the Age of the Universe.
I studied at Boston University. Among my influencers were Robert Cohen, Abner Shimony,
John Stachel, and Harry Oliver.
Harry Oliver did a sabbatical in 1972 at Cambridge University with Fred Hoyle. You may
have overlapped a bit. I met Harry Oliver shortly upon his return to Boston University’s
School of Theology. Unfortunately for both of us, we did not focus on Mach and Stachel’s
understanding of the hole argument and how it is pre-ideational.
I thought you would be amused with the Quiet Expansion work. Most of the academy
has ignored the simplicity of base-2 exponential notation and the simple geometries
that I rather naively believe tile and tessellate the universe.
Thank you for your irascible independence throughout a lifetime. Now that the world
has seen Hawking’s story, isn’t it time to do your story with Fred Hoyle and all those
who have steadfastly hung on? Thank you.