Following the work of Elizabeth Gibney…

Elizabeth Gibney
London, England UK

Google Scholar
Homepage: dblp
Nature Magazine (NPG Journals)
Scientific American articles

Second email: 10 February 2022 at 3:45 PM

Dear Elizabeth:

The Gil Lonzarich quote (just below) always makes me smile.

Do you have any plans to follow up that article?

Thank you.


What if each quantum critical point is just the beginning of another generation? …probing the boundaries around those states could reveal more phases, and studying the boundaries of those could reveal yet more, with discoveries unfolding in a fractal manner.” – Gil Lonzarich
First Tweet: 9 June 2020 at 10:55 PM

Please expose our lack of knowledge about quantum fluctuations!

Our overview of your work will be this page and its URL is

Aristotle said that the universe could be tiled and tessellated with tetrahedrons. It was a huge mistake. Aristotle’s mistake was replicated by the greats for over 1800 years!

First email: Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 4:51 PM

Dear Ms. Gibney,

Thank you for your wonderful research, writing, and insights. When I discovered your article about Gil Lonzarich, I could not put it down. Within a week, in October 2017 I was quoting you and pointing people to key parts of that article.

My interest has a very unusual history.

In December 2011 I had backed into a base-2 model of the universe in a high school geometry class by dividing the tetrahedron (and the octahedron within it) by 2. Our classroom models had 1.5″ edges all around. In 45 divisions, we were down there with CERN’s particles. In 67 more divisions we were at the Planck’s wall. Even Zeno could go no smaller. We then multiplied our classroom object by two, and in 90 doublings, we were out to the age/size of the Universe.

202 progressive doublings of the Planck base units and you have a little mathematical model of the universe. “So what? What can you do with it?” asked my wife, Hattie. Well, for one, we might be able to understand boundaries and phases of nature a bit better.

It took us awhile to realize that this was not another version of Kees Boeke’s 1957 base-10 model. Base-2 is highly integrative. It’s what cells do. It captures something rich and textural about life, so we dubbed it our STEM tool and began sharing it with others.

I rather think it is quite a bit more.

The current homepage of our ever-growing website tells that story as succinctly as I ever have. Being succinct is not among my strengths.

Would you take a look and tell me what you think?
Where have we lost our way? Is there hope?
I think so, but hearing from somebody with your clarity of thought
would be most helpful.

Thank you.

Most sincerely,

PS. If you’d like to look at the flow of the numbers across the 202 notations, please take a look at the horizontally-scrolled chart: It tells so many stories. -B