The work of the Bureau International Poids et Mesures (BIPM)

BIPM is the keeper of the International System of Units (SI) and the 24-hour, international reference time scale known as UTC.

The BIPM also convenes the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM). A diplomatic event, the 27th general conference started on Tuesday, 15 and ran to Friday, the 18 November 2022, at the Palais des Congrès de Versailles (10 rue de la Chancellerie, 78000 Versailles, Yvelines) in France.

You have to be a delegate, an official representative of a member state, to attend.

We have requested through NIST and CODATA that the international standards bodies name six groups of numbers between the yoctosecond and the Planck scale. This is all simple, basic math of the infinitesimal. All six groups are mathematically-defined notations and are now often used. The numbers start just after the already recognized (and now more often used) yoctosecond, and goes down to the smallest recognized size, the PlanckSecond of PlanckTime. We are also requesting that the already frequently used term, PlanckSecond, be formally recognized.

Thank you.

Second email: Saturday, 20 May 2023 @ 8:04 AM

Mrs. Céline Fellag Ariouet
BIPM, Pavillon de Breteuil
F-92312 Sèvres Cedex FRANCE

Dear Mrs. C. Fellag Ariouet:

You may be interested to take a look at one of the earlier uses of those two new designations, Rontosecond and Quectosecond, officially cited as such from your meetings from 15-18 November 2022 in Paris, of the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) of your International Commission of Weights and Measures (BIPM) whereby you all adopted Resolution 3 making it a globally acceptable name for the range 10−30 to 10−32 of the infinitesimal scale of time.

Our page under construction using your designations is here:

There you will see this chart inserted below. If your people find any glaring errors, I would appreciate your comments.

Thank you.



1. The Now –2028. Day –16015. Picosecond – 104Informal, unofficial
2. Billion – 1999. Hour15516. Femtosecond – 9422. Mecosecond – 34
3. Million – 18910. Minute – 15017. Attosecond –8423. Duecosecond – 25
4. Thousand –17911. Second  14418. Zeptosecond 7424. Trecosecond –15
5. Year – 16912. Millisecond – 13419. Yoctosecond – 6425. Tetrecosecond 5
6. Month –16513. Microsecond – 12420. Rontosecond-54SI Certified (BIPM):
7. Week 16314. Nanosecond-11421. Quectosecond – 4426. PlanckTime  0
First email: 30 September 2022 @ 3:17 PM

Céline Fellag Ariouet
Dr. Martin Milton, Director of the BIPM

Although great planning is going into the 27th CGPM conference, it needs to go further. It appears from the Draft Resolutions that only two extensions will be considered beyond the already officially recognized yoctosecond (See your PDF document, “SI Concise summary”, page 3, Table 3. Those two extensions (and subs) are 10−27 (ronto) and 10−30 (quecto)  (page 22).  

You will miss the opportunity to officially name 10−33, 10−36, 10−39 and 10−42. The 10−42 group includes 10−44 PlanckTime.

Whichever organization, probably CODATA, submitted this naming proposal, send it back and ask that they call emergency meetings to virtually gather and name these other four domains and resubmit before November 1.

You would not want to miss an opportunity to do a job well.

The naming conventions for the infinitesimal have become exquisitely important since Frank Wilczek (Nobel, 2004) wrote a series of articles about the Planck scale for Physics Today. Very quickly, the importance of the Planck scale in theoretical physics became entirely evident to most working within these domains. 

I am available to answer any questions, but must apologize that my French has not improved since 1980 when I studied with Olivier Costa de Beauregard and Jean-Pierre Vigier at the Institut Henri Poincaré. Thank you.

Warmest regards,


PS. Here is how these are displayed within Wikipedia:

  • One yoctosecond = 1×10-24 
  • One xonosecond = 1×10-27 (You will set a new standard with rontosecond.)
  • One vecosecond = 1×10-30 (You will set a new standard with quectosecond.)
  • One mecosecond = 1×10-33 Increasingly used and in question.
  • One duecosecond = 1×10-36 Increasingly used and in question.
  • One trecosecond 1×10-39 Increasingly used and in question.
  • One tetrecosecond = 1×10-42 Increasingly used and in question.
  • Planck Time = 5.391×10-44 


The James Webb Space Telescope challenges big bang cosmology…

Left Yellow Arrow
Right Yellow Arrow

Pages: Agree | Gravity| Hope | Hypostasis Mistakes | PI (π) | Questions | Sphere | STEM | Up

From infinitesimal sphere to galaxy to universe
by Bruce E. Camber This is a working first draft.
First Read: Plow thru it; ignore all the links.

Abstract. Our evolving theory posits a most-simple start of our Universe by applying base-2 notation (multiplying by 2) to the Planck-or-Stoney base units.[*] The entire universe is mapped within 202 notations that logically and mathematically encapsulate everything, everywhere for all time.[†] That’s the outline. Structures are the next issue. Given the utter simplicity of the sphere and its total dependency on pi (π), hypothesized is that those base units first manifest as an infinitesimal sphere. All natural units, that sphere is projected to be the first moment of time.[a] Assuming one sphere per unit of time and length, anywhere from 539-to-4605 tredecillion infinitesimal spheres per second manifest.[b] Those infinitesimal spheres, an obvious candidate for dark matter-and-energy, have been filling our universe from the beginning. It creates a grid.[c] A radically different scenario (to big bang cosmology), this grid outlines systems for our universe. We began in 2011 in a New Orleans high school geometry class.[d] Initially considered to be a most comprehensive STEM tool, it was idiosyncratic because it didn’t start with the big bang.[e] Ours is a quiet expansion. All notations are always active. Initially we started with the simple tetrahedron and octahedron until a scholar convinced us the sphere was more fundamental.[f] We then learned about the history and deep dynamics of close-cubic packing of equal spheres (ccp) and its generation of tetrahedral-octahedral structures.[g] It is smooth; there are no-gaps at the start of this model of the universe. There is a perfection of the three faces of the sphere, continuity-symmetry-harmony. [h]

Background: Since the 1980s the big bang theory (BBT) has been the default theory within cosmology; and whether we know it or not, it profoundly impacts us all. Two generations of scholars have known nothing else. So, this effort to lift up a different theory is admittedly ambitious. We do it not to be different or competitive, but because we think our theory answers more questions while being more inclusive, more comprehensive, more kind, more liberating, more integrative, and a bit less judgmental. Also, we are not alone. There are others; highly-respected scholars have said, “The BBT is wrong.” [1]


Our plan of action for our base-2 model is to study big bang problems and scientific paradoxes to see if our quiet expansion might address them. Big bang advocates like Sean Carroll are so sure of its veracity, he has made statements like, “…it is true that there is no point doubting the Big Bang model.” But then, he goes on to confess, “The first minute is a little bit up for grabs.”[2]

The first minute is everything. In our model even the first second and zeptosecond are everything!


The model. There are a total of 202 base-2 notations that go from the first moment of time until today. It is 100% simple mathematics. The first second (between Notations 143-and-144) involves over two-thirds of all notations. Carroll’s first minute is between Notations 148-and-149. The first year, a light year, is between Notations 168-and-169. Each notation confirms the mathematics of the speed of light; the Planck Length (or multiple of it) is the distance light travels in Planck Time (or the corresponding multiple of it).

This model readily encapsulates the BBT.[3] It works with all other theories. Simple math is simple math. Yet, the path of scientific discovery and for the absorption of new data is wavering. On our path we’ve found cover-ups,[4] extralogic,[5] and a bit of arrogance.[6]


Hotspot. Results from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) are pouring in. While most astrophysicists are looking for some way to participate, we’re looking for new challenges to big bang cosmology as we’ve understood it. These old galaxy records are telling us something new: GN-z11 galaxy, discovered in 2015, held the record for seven years by going back to within 400 million years “after the big bang.” That would be 13.4 billion years ago. GLASS-z13, a galaxy found in July 2022, went back to 352.3 million years after the start. That would be 13.4577 billion years ago. A bit later in July 2022 the CEERS-93316 galaxy was observed and it goes back to 235.8 million years after the start. That would be about 13.556 billion years ago.

Astrophysicist Dr. Rebecca Bowler (Manchester), reporting through the Cosmic Dawn Center of the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen and of the National Space Institute at the Technical University of Denmark, comments, “Already we’ve found more galaxies in the very early Universe than computer simulations predicted, so there is clearly a lot of open questions about how and when the first stars and galaxies formed.”

Retrieved September 24, 2022:
CEERS-93316 ARXIV: arXiv:2201.10576v2

Yes, there are a lot of open questions and our model opens many more, primary among them is the nature of time.

The JWST is breaking records. Hopefully it’ll continue for many years to come.[7] More to come


The logic of it all. The 202-notations build on each other. No notation is ever complete. The universe evolves together. What is happening to time? Every notation is sharing it equally. Within the first minutes, everything is okay. But in Notation-169, there is a year’s distance from Notation-1. If Notation-1 is still active and participating in making Notation-169, they share the same time and same moment. The same is true with Notation-179 at 1000 years, 189 (1,000,000 years), 199 (1,000,000,000 years). All notations are involved with the unfolding of Notation-202. Space-time becomes a very different concept. These two no longer separate us. They are dynamically involved with everything all of the time.[8]

That is even a lot for me to process.


Counting galaxies is not as straightforward as we think. In October 2016 NASA, European Space Agency (ESA), and the Royal Astronomical Society (RSA) jointly announced a tenfold increase in our galaxy count to over two trillion galaxies in today’s universe. Although some astrophysicists continue to use the old estimate of 100-to-200 billion galaxies, Dr. Chris Conselice bumped that number up to two trillion based on Hubble data.[9] And now, we know with the JWST, those numbers are increasing. The JWST is exuding new questions. Along with many old questions, the big bang theory will be hard pressed to answer them.

Perhaps a little exercise will help. 13.82 billion years may seem like a long time. But, if we convert it to seconds, the results is 436,117,076,600,000,000 or 436 quadrillion seconds.[10] In that time, does the big bang theory account for all the stars and planets and its smoothness? Some scholars are already saying, “No,” especially as the JWST seems to be reaching further and further back in time.

Perfectly smooth. In our simple model, from Notation-1 to about Notation-64, the universe is perfectly smooth for a reason. The geometries are perfectly filling.[11] There is no “lumpiness.” There are no quantum fluctuations. The essence of homogeneity and isotropy are instantiated here. From Notation-64 to Notation-134, the essentials of our physical world manifest. From Notation-134 to Notations 194, the foundations for our Solar System and Milky Way emerge. From Notation-194 to Notation-202 large scale structure formation evolves. It is all happening in this moment of time within Notation-202. sustained and dynamically related to every other notation. We cannot add the observed galaxies together as we go back in time. We would be looking at the same galaxies as each is being shaped within that given point in time.

That statement can be tested and this theory, a quiet expansion, can be either thrown out or further studied.


Notations. To date, the Hubble and the JWST only analyze data from the last seven notations:
1. Notation-202 starts at 10.9816+ billion years. There’s only been about 2.8394 billion years of churn.
2. Notation-201 starts at 5.4908+ billion years and goes 5.4908 billion years adding unique substance and structure to the universe, and continues today within Notation 202 and with all shorter notations.
3. Notation-200 starts at 2.744+ billion years and uniquely goes 2.744 billion years adding its unique substance and structures but today functions with and within all other notations.
4. Notation-199 starts at 1.3727+ billion years. It first builds on Notations 1-198 and then extends and builds Notation 200, then 201, and now 202 for about another 11 billion years.
5. Notation-198 at 686.806+ million years, is an extension of Notations 1-197, then becomes symmetrical with all those notations, and that symmetry now extends into Notation-202.
6. Notation-197 at 343.15+ million years is where GN-z11, GLASS-z13 and the CEERS-93316 galaxies were discovered. Interpreting that data correctly will be a challenge.
7. Notation-196 at 171.5+ million years and it today, right now, functions within all other notations.[12]

A Prediction. Among all the pressure points on the big bang theory, I predict the pressure from the James Webb Space Telescope will become so pervasive, alternatives will be demanded. Smoothness at the start is in our favor; at some point in time, among all the alternatives, our model and theory will be critically reviewed and some of several possible alternatives will begin to grow in stature. And, as one of them does, using words like “after the Big Bang” will slowly wane, then stop being used. Living documents will be updated, and then the term will disappear except for within our historical documents.[13]

We’ve contrasted our model with the big bang by calling it a “Quiet Expansion.” Because its simplicity allows for diversity and complexity, I am hopeful that the work within this website will stimulate some discussion that helps the process along to grasp how it is that we go from an infinitesimal sphere to a galaxy to our universe.

Thank you. -BEC


Endnotes & Footnotes
There may not be many because all these points already have pages within this website.

[*] Base Units. We start with two “natural-units gurus,George Johnstone Stoney with his base units and Max Planck with his. The ISO and NIST may eventually come up with even better numbers. When base-2 notation is applied, these numbers are a parallel construct and by Notation-202 end up in essentially in the same moment.

[†] Another Map of the Universe. “The most detailed map ever created of the cosmic microwave background…” of the universe was done in 2009 when the Planck satellite measured the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background radiation or CMBR). Scholars like George Efstathiou, director of the Kavli Institute for Cosmology at the University of Cambridge, believe it is “380,000 years after the big bang.” For us, time and temperature are works-in-progress; there are so many open questions. Our little map of 202 notations “mathematically encapsulates everything, everywhere for all time” so we are working to grasp the fullness of the Efstathiou 380,000 years, and his time-stamp, “after the big bang.”

In our model, all notations are always active and time is fundamentally redefined; the universe is foundationally exponential.

[a] Infinitesimal Spheres. So once there is a mathematical map of the universe, the question is raised, “What does that first moment look like?” The focus returns to the derivation of the natural units by G.S. Stoney and Max Planck. The most consistent and fundamental part of those equations is pi. So, we assume pi with its special numbers that are endless, totally-changing, and always the same. One enigmatic statement follows others. There are the perfections of sphere; its internal and external symmetries are bewildering. There are the harmonic functions of spheres. There is a deep and inherent energy of spheres. There are electromagnetic and gravitational factors. And, the list goes on. Spheres are magical. The centerpoints come alive. So, an infinitesimal sphere is projected to create the first moment of time.

[b] Tredecillion. If we assume there is one infinitesimal sphere per unit of Planck or Stoney length and Planck or Stoney Time, very large numbers result.

We’ve had to get comfortable with largest numbers and smallest numbers. Students should begin seeing such numbers in the fourth grade. There would be 539 tredecillion spheres per second using Planck Time, and 4605 tredecillion infinitesimal spheres per second using Stoney Time. Each number would be followed by 42 zeroes!

[c] Grid. At one time this grid was called the aether. We adopted a label Frank Wilczek gave it. Does it logically start with the smallest units of length and time? Does it define dark matter-and-energy? We believe this grid of infinitesimal spheres below Notation-64 is an excellent candidate. It has already been well-defined by at least nine disciplinesLanglands programsstring theorysupersymmetryloop quantum gravitycausal dynamical triangulationcausal set theoryfield theoriesspectral standard model, and hypothetical particles. These first 64 notations are where these nine studies get integrated into the larger grids and will make that infamous bond between relativity and quantum physics.

Within Notations 0-and-1 we see the Janus-face of the finite-infinite relation defined by pi’s continuity-symmetry-harmony . A tempestuous concept laced with troubles, it actually gives this model stability.

[d] High School. We all want our children to succeed. We all know education is a vital part of it and science-math education is a key. Yet, the big bang theory obfuscates and confuses, and the scholarship around it just doesn’t empower. We must all be grateful for all efforts by scholars to educate the public. But most important is educating the children. Since 2011 we have been pleading with scholars around the world to tell us what is wrong with our model. None have. After hundreds of emails and ten years, I have concluded there is nothing “wrong” with our model; it is just wildly idiosyncratic but we believe it is on the right path.7 That it came out of a high school also suggests that all educators on all levels need to be brought into the mainstream of research. There can be no elitism within scholarship. There is a place for simple observations like ours.

[e] STEM. It is a problem that this first article about it all has been rejected by over a dozen publications without comment. Initially I thought the errors were so egregious it just wasn’t worth their time. Yet, out of hundreds of scholars who have been asked to comment, a few would have pointed out something if they could, so we continue to follow and build upon the geometries, the numbers, and the logic.

[f] Geometry. This project started as a study of the most simple tetrahedron and octahedron. Together they fill space perfectly. Separately, they are the first step within the domain of quantum fluctuations. Our students and faculty need to know these simple geometries, how they work together and what they are capable of doing alone.

Prof. Dr. Philip Davis of Brown University finally convinced us that the sphere was more simple and fundamental. That opened a much deeper analysis of circles, spheres, and pi (π).

[g] CCP. We need a section in our geometry book: Close-cubic packing of equal spheres (ccp). Here begins the generation of tetrahedral-octahedral structures. Here geometry takes its place as a key function of our universe. It is relevant and a key critical part of who we are.

That the Chinese Communist Party shares those initials is fortuitous. There are several Chinese scholars who follow our work yet politics taints scholarship. We become overly sensitive to power struggles (politics) when the most important thing is the veracity of a concept and how it coheres with others. This work is important because it crosses political lines and looks for common ground and we find it within the sphere and pi as the hyphen between the finite-infinite and quantitative-qualitative. We know that hyphen is continuity-symmetry-harmony which is an expression of the first dynamic – the manifestation of an infinitesimal sphere, the second dynamic – sphere stacking, and the third dynamic – cubic-close packing of equal spheres.

[h] Perfections. This exploration began by going inside the tetrahedron and octahedron down to the Planck base units. We learn about geometry, mathematics (base-2), and about natural units and their formulae. We ostensibly learn a little about a continuity-symmetry-harmony that is shared by everything, everywhere throughout all time. We learn about smoothness, no gaps, and perfection and that becomes the centerpiece of this model and theory.


[1] Big Bang Theory is wrong. There are real experts who believe the big bang theory, as constituted by HawkingGuth and others, is wrong. Their colleague, Neil Turok, says it as if the universe is actually in a perpetual state of big bangs. Turok’s co-author, Job Feldbrugge says, “Our research implies that we either should look for another picture to understand the very early universe, or that we have to rethink the most elementary models of quantum gravity.” Notation-0 within our model is the start, and it is perpetually starting.

Job Feldbrugge et al. Lorentzian quantum cosmology, Physical Review D (2017). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.95.103508 Read more at:

J. Feldbrugge (Perimeter Institute), J.L. Lehners (Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics and Albert Einstein Institute), and N. Turok (Perimeter Institute), “Inconsistencies of the New No-Boundary Proposal,arXiv:1805.01609 (PDF), Universe 4 (2018) no.10, 100.

Our theory is more liberating because it starts with things that we know, simple geometries and simple math, then goes out and includes everything for all time. Thus, it’s also more integrative and inclusive. And, it is a bit less judgemental because it includes the qualitative. It is a theory with heart and feelings that doesn’t promote nihilism.

[2] Video: R. Penrose, S. Carroll, L. Mersini-Hougton, Big Bang Creation Myths, AIA, (1:58/38:11), 2018

Sean Carroll, a distinguished professor at Caltech, occupies Richard Feynman’s office and uses his desk! He has a natural impatience, yet he seems to be earnestly seeking the truth so I try to understand his logic. His big bang theory is not quite the Hawking-Guth model, yet it’s not yet clear to me how he would differentiate. We know quite assuredly he would not start with the Planck base units, or use base-2 notation, infinitesimal spheres, and 202-notations; and, he would not affirm a no-gap perfection of substance-and-structure within the first 64-notations given through geometries of sphere-stacking. The first minute is between Notations 148-and-149. The first second is between Notation-143 and Notation-144. The zeptosecond (1×10-21) is between Notations 65-to-67, the range of first measuring quantum fluctuations. There’s a lot of work to do to interpret those notations properly.

[3] Calculations. The horizontally-scrolled chart was developed in 2016 and 2017. We did a sampling of six notations — 3167101137167 & 199 — just to examine the logic of the numbers. We could see how it encapsulates the BBT. In that process it became apparent that most of the epochs of the big bang theory could readily be observed as a process within these notations. Turok and his team were right. The universe is perpetually starting. All the notations were always active, building on each other.

That was a huge statement for us; it challenged us to redefine time. Hardly trivial, it’s been challenging. We started to realize that most of the dynamics of the big bang theory could readily be encapsulated within our quiet expansion. The first three epochs of the big bang theory, barely a microsecond, were redefined.

If each notation is always active, these observations aren’t past, but are the activity within the current day within a specific notation. As commented within earlier homepages, a re-interpretation of the redshift is also in order. We have a lot to learn.

[4] Cover-Ups We have found unwitting cover-ups. First, the big bang theory unwittingly covers up the pathway to a quiet expansion. It took the naïveté of high school people to follow basic geometries down into the Planck scale, apply base-2, map the universe, and then rather innocently ask, “What do we do with this?”

Second, in much the same way, quantum physics emerged and slowly affirmed the primacy of its fluctuations and indeterminacy without ever being able to explain those roots or origins. It got established as rigorous theory with a huge unknown for its start. It, too, became an unwitting cover up.

While learning about spheres, we were introduced to a tetrahedral gap and learned about a third cover-up initiated by Aristotle. He made a mistake and scholars didn’t catch it for 1800+ years. Even today, scholars do not know what to do with the geometric gap that Aristotle missed. That gap breaks the perfect filling of space. In the process of that study, we also uncovered a heretofore unrecognized octahedral gap. We work with perfect tetrahedrons and octahedrons, so once the question was asked about five octahedrons sharing a common centerpoint, it took minutes to see the exact same gap as with five tetrahedrons.

We then found more subtle coverups. Our most popular interactive geometry software (IGS) and their dynamic geometry environments (DGEs) easily accommodate these gaps. Never programmed for these gaps, it’s a little like Aristotle’s failure. We also discovered that the geometric construction kits like the Zometool also would not display these gaps. Further analysis of both software systems and construction kits is underway.

[5] Extralogic. Within the circles of people who study logic, there are rules and conventions. There is also extralogic that can be a little like religion and look like Guth’s inflation. MUCH MORE TO COME… See Ed Zalta.

[6] Arrogance. I enjoy Einstein’s quote. It’s true, but arrogance is endemic to the many insecurities of the human family and scholars are not exempt from them.

[7] Hotspot: James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). If we do not have a construct for the first second, there is no way that we will have the first year or the first million years (Notation 189) correct. Observational technology reaches back in between Notation 196-to-197; that 13.556 billion years is 235.8 million years “after the big bang.” The big bang theory misses all the most formative processes of the universe. The JWST started capturing data in July 2022. It sits within a dynamic tension out on the L2 (Lagrange Point 2) about 1.2 km from earth. The Planck satellite mission, also within L2, has been working since 2009. In all probability, the JWST will do equally well, if not better. We have many years to be capturing data to help us determine the real realities of this universe. We look forward to more of the work of Rebecca Bowler and the Cosmic Dawn Center. They are building on a long history about which we are now learning: List of the most distant astronomical objects.

[8] Time. In our model of the universe all notations are always active. Each builds off of the other. There is a dynamic reach from the first notation to the 202nd. It is fully symmetric from Notation-1 to Notation-201 and to just a small sliver of 202. Time is always right Now. In that light, the galaxy counters may well want to re-think their galaxy count. The looking back may be notational. We may be witnessing activity within a notation today. That is a very difficult concept to wrap one’s mind around.

So, if the electroweak processes are based on the Fermi scale whereby one fermi equals 1×10-13 cm or about .00000000000010 centimeters, if it were observable, we’d be looking at today’s activity within Notation-73.

We’ll continue struggling with the logic of it all.

[9] Galaxy Counting. Some astrophysicists like Mario Livio continue to use the old estimate of 100-to-200 billion galaxies even though in 2016 Dr. Chris Conselice bumped that number up to two trillion based on Hubble data. Today some speculative folks are saying that the number is yet much higher.

If all time is now, and there is only a infinitesimal sliver of time that is directional, all these estimates need to be revisited.

[10] 436 quadrillion seconds or a little more closely, 436,117,076,600,000,000, introduces a new reality that it all has to happen within 436 quadrillion seconds. It is the next group of numbers after a trillion. When looked at in this way, 13.82 billion years doesn’t seem much time at all.

[11] Perfections. Quantum theory became the de facto background of our universe through the 1920s and ’30s. In our model, the universe starts out perfectly smooth with no gaps. Quantum physics has little possibility of breaking into the model until quantum geometries become systemic. We suspect in the first pass through the first second within Notation-143, there is too much thrust and density for any of the quantum geometries to manifest. Did it take a year, 1000 years, or a million-or-a-billion years? I wouldn’t hazard a guess. Yet, once there is a system whereby quantum fluctuations begin, I suspect it then works its way back to Notation-67 where it first becomes measurable. This domain will become an entirely new area of mathematics and physics. I call it hypostatic.

[12] Notations. GN-z11 galaxy, discovered in 2015 in the Ursa Major constellation, held the record for seven years by going back to within 400 million years of the start. That would be 13.4 billion years ago. GLASS-z13, a galaxy found in July 2022, went back to 352.3 million years after the start. That would be 13.4577 billion years ago. A bit later in July 2022 the CEERS-93316 galaxy (ArXiv) was observed and it goes back to 235.8 million years after the start. That would be about 13.556 billion years ago.

This model easily accommodates them all.

[13] From Laurence Tognetti’s Universe Today August 2, 2022,  “The record for the farthest galaxy was just broken again, now just 250 million years after the Big Bang”.


References & Resources
As these references are studied, key references and resources will be added.within this website.

CMBR, Dark Matter-Dark Energy: We’ll be looking into the 1960’s data of Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson from the Holmdel Horn AntennaCMB. We’ll even be going back to the 1933 computations of Fritz Zwicky of Caltech. He had a way of calling people he didn’t like spherical bastards. Given our idiosyncratic approach, I suspect we’d get lumped with them! There’ll be much more to come.

“…space-time itself does expand faster than the speed of light” and “…how it is possible that there may be galaxies that are almost 100 billion light years apart.” – Gerardus ‘t Hooft (Nobel, 2019)

We are opening a path of discovery to find source materials about the Theory of Relativity that could give us insights into those two quotes above by Utrecht professor, Gerardus ‘t Hooft. They come from his book, Time in Powers of Ten, the Forward (page xiv). First we consider a work by deSitter, Einstein’s theory of gravitation and its astronomical consequences (1917). There is this more recent comment by Devin Powell regarding GPS systems: “Relativity describes why a clock on a satellite ticks a few dozen microseconds faster than a clock on Earth; without accounting for that discrepancy, GPS technologies wouldn’t work” (eighth paragraph). It will be important to determine if that could account for the apparent “apartness” between galaxies.

Extralogical:  “…the bulk of extant mathematics is believed to be derivable logically from a small number of extralogical axioms, such as the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (or its extension ZFC), from which no inconsistencies have as yet been derived. Thus, elements of the logicist programmes have proved viable, but in the process theories of classes, sets and mappings, and higher-order logics other than with Henkin semantics, have come to be regarded as extralogical in nature, in part under the influence of Quine‘s later thought.”

Retrieved from Logicism, Wikipedia, September 25, 2022

GN-z11: After seven years, attention is shifting to CEER-93316 and the JWST. However, in 2016 it was Pascal Oesch (Yale, Geneva) and Gabriel Brammer (Niels Bohr Institute) who reported their 2015 findings and have been the voices of GN-z11. If our model has any viability, these two would be excellent minds to reconsider what the redshift is tell using if all time is now. We’ll keep you posted. There’ll be much more to come!


There will be emails to many of our scholars about these twelve points.


There will also be many instant messages to thought leaders about these twelve points.

5:22 PM · Oct 2, 2022 @hankgreen You are amazing. How about taking a look at a more simple approach to cosmic inflation. Start with the Planck base units, assume an infinitesimal sphere manifests. Not unlike Lemaitre’s 1928 earliest theory, this is a disrupter: Hope you enjoy!

@APSphysics and@PhysRevE Remarkable story of the expansion of articles. Too few questions of the basics… time, space, light, Planck or Stoney-base units, the gap to CERN-scale. Apply base-2 to the Planck scale, 202 notations encapsulate all time, all space. Let’s question the first 64 notations.

8:45 AM · Sep 29, 2022 @UoNHumanities (University of Nottingham), @UonHistory and 8 others: The question is really, “What is value?” And the answer opens the universe: And that opens QUESTIONS about the universe: and that opens all the displinces, the many faces of life we need to celebrate/grasp:

2:54 PM · Sep 26, 2022 @NautilusMag Our early universe is just too smooth for the big bang. Could our little thought experiment, base-2 notation applied to the Planck base units account for expansion, CMB, and other key issues? It might:


Participate. You are always invited. Let’s have some fun. Poke holes, and make up new lyrics!


Keys to this page, communicate

• This page became the homepage on September 26. It is still “under construction” even today.
• The last update was on October 2, 2022.
• This page was initiated on September 10, 2022.
• The URL for this file is
• The test headline: About how an infinitesimal sphere becomes a galaxy.
• The current headline: From an infinitesimal sphere to a galaxy
• The test byline is: Results from the JWST will put pressure on Big Bang Cosmology.
• Current byline: The James Webb Space Telescope challenges big bang cosmology…

25 at 4:54 PM


“If the anomaly in S8 and the Hubble constant stands the test of time, then both may imply new physics.” – Avi Loeb

Avi Loeb, The Center for Astrophysics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

Articles by Avi
ArXiv (741): Overview of the Galileo Project, August 2022; Direct Measurement of Cosmological Parameters from the Cosmic Deceleration of Extragalactic Objects, 1998, plus more.
Books: Extraterrestrial, 2021
Homepage(s): Google Scholar, IAS, inSPIREHEP Scientific American, Smithsonian, Wikipedia
Publications: Quote (in the header just above): Our Unexpectedly Smooth Universe May Point To New Physics, Govert Schilling, Sky & Telescope, July 31, 2020
Twitter: National Cathedral
YouTube: CNBC, TOE

First email: 10 September 2022 @ 3:29 PM (an updated version)

Dear Prof. Dr. Avi Loeb:

You are open to idiosyncratic concepts. The question is, “…just how idiosyncratic?” Our work all started with simple math and geometry in a high school and I do not think it will be a waste your time to review a bit of our work.

By the way, we share some commonalities.

In 1972 at Harvard I worked with Arthur Loeb back within the Philomorphs. In the attic of Sever Hall, geometry was everything; Bucky Fuller was part of it.  In 1975 with Arthur McGill over in the Divinity School, we studied Austin Farrer’s Finite and Infinite and it seared in my mind with the need for a better, more encompassing definition of infinity.

Later, in 1979 I was invited by Steven Weinberg to come by his Lyman office. My last note to him was just ten days before his death. With my mixed bag of studies, continuity-symmetry-harmony were not particularly meaningful to him, but he didn’t call it utter nonsense to my face! He would with these two articles: First three minutes revisited and Dark Matter-Dark Energy.

So I ask, “Might we take the Planck base units as the symbolic representation of the first moment in time? Might we apply base-2 to those units to create a chart with boundaries and parameters?” There are just 202 base-2 notations from that first moment to this day. From Notation-1 to Notation-143, essentially the first second, it captured and is currently capturing all but a microsecond of classic big bang cosmology.

Much more recently I found that continuity-symmetry-harmony describe the three faces of pi and, of course, pi is involved with the most pivotal equations of physics. Might pi also define the first units of space-time? …an infinitesimal sphere?  If so, that sphere emerges about 64 notations from the first measurements of quantum fluctuations.

May I go on?  Thank you.

Most sincerely,


PS. Eleonora Di Valentino (and colleagues at Snowmass 2021) also raised the spectre that S8 could be calling for a new physics. -BEC


Note: John Langeloth Loeb Jr. CBE is another Loeb in my life. An American businessman, former United States Ambassador to Denmark, and former delegate to the United Nations, he is an advocate for religious freedom and separation of church and state. In 2009 he founded the George Washington Institute for Religious Freedom located in Rhode Island. He is another very impressive Loeb! -BEC

Upon discovering the work of Yair Shenfeld…

Yair Shenfeld, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts USA

Homepage(s): CV, Publications (ArXiv) and slides

First email: September 7, 2022 at 7:38 PM

Dear Dr. Yair Shenfeld:

Might a most simple geometry be involved with the Brownian transport map? My intuition says, “Maybe. It’s worth checking out.”

1. Five tetrahedrons. Are you aware of the 7.35610+ degree gap created by five tetrahedrons sharing a common center point?  Aristotle missed it. Mysteries in Packing Regular Tetrahedra is an unusual history (PDF), but it is usually forgotten and is relatively unrecognized even though in 2015 the AMS gave the Conant award to the authors.*

2. Five octahedrons. More recently in May 2022 we became aware of the same gap using five octahedrons: This simple geometric figure consists of five octahedrons, all sharing a centerpoint (three sharing two faces with another octahedron and two sharing only one face). It is relatively unknown and undocumented.

3. A Stack. An interesting image is when the five-tetrahedrons are added on the top and bottom. That stack has 15 objects sharing the centerpoint. Interactive geometry software (IGS) with their dynamic geometry environments (DGEs) do not easily re-create this geometry. None of the kits like Zometool can. This simple geometry requires true physical models. 

I took the picture of those pages in June but to date it appears that there is no scholarship about it. Have you seen any scholarly analysis of it?  Do you think it is important? My intuition is telling me it is related to quantum fluctuations. If so, then it is huge and it will become a major part of scholarship. Thank you. 


* Key parts of this history came from an MIT professor of mathematics, Dirk Jan Struik from his work, Het Probleem ‘De impletione loci’ (Dutch), Nieuw Archief voor Wiskunde, Series 2, 15 (1925–1928), no. 3, 121–137 (translation) reinforces the conclusion that “Worldviews limit perspective” and “A mathematically-integrated view of the Universe does not.”  -BEC

Worldviews are incomplete. UniverseViews are inclusive and empowering.

Left Yellow Arrow
Right Yellow Arrow

Pages: Agree | Gravity| Hope.|.Hypostasis Mistakes.PI (π) |.Questions | Sphere | STEM.|.Up

From the James Webb Space Telescope, left to right, Stephan’s Quintet, Southern Ring Nebula and the Cartwheel Galaxy

A Mathematically-Integrated UniverseView
by Bruce E. Camber, a working draft

Overview: The mathematics of the smallest things render things like stars, nebula, and galaxies. In 1874 in Dublin George Stoney* calculated an infinitesimally small unit for length and time using dimensionless constants. In 1899 in Berlin, Max Planck did similar calculations and got slightly different results. Symbolic placeholders, somewhere in their range of numbers is the very first unit of time. If we apply base-2 notation (doublings) to that assumption, it renders 202 logically-related groups right up to the current time. It is the most simple mathematical outline of our universe and it ontologically opens the universe with the smallest, most-basic units that make everything-everywhere-for all time. We begin to see how everything is connected to everything. And, as that math comes alive and begins to demonstrate its efficacy, a dynamic understanding of cosmology opens. Nothing will ever seem quite so far away or long ago; and, the universe becomes our home.

Simple mathematics. The universe is outlined by 202 base-2 notations from the Planck base units to the current time. The first 64 notations are below thresholds of direct measurement. It’s an infinitesimal area that has been, and continues to be, the unwitting subject of such diverse studies as Langlands programs, string theory (including M-Theory, F-theory, type II and its offshoots), supersymmetry (SUSY), loop quantum gravity (LQG), causal dynamical triangulation (CDT), causal set theory (CST), field theories (QFT, CFT, LFT), spectral standard model (SSM), hypothetical particles, and much more. These studies start simple and take us into complexity. And, each will defined on, as well as define this grid of the first 64 base-2 notations.[1]

Redefining time. Newton’s concept of absolute time became common-sense long before Einstein; yet Einstein’s alternative made very little sense. Is time an illusion? “No, but…” So, we’ve started to redefine time. It’ll be a major hurdle for each of us. The sense of past-present-future is hardly an illusion. Perhaps we need to think of it like we do a sense — seeing, hearing, smelling, etc. Linear time is quite real but transitory. Our guess is that it gets recompiled within exponential time within our sleep (See three paragraphs just below, nature of sleep cycles).[2]

Finite-and-infinite. This Janus-faced relation has been controversial throughout time. If we redefine it as the quantitative-qualitative in light of the continuity-symmetry-harmony of pi and in light of the other dimensionless constants found with the first 64 notations, then our historic and personal issues regarding infinity may eventually be seen in a new light.[3]

Perfection-imperfection. There has been a lack of engagement with (1) the geometries and physics of perfection, particularly of continuity-symmetry-harmony where there are no gaps and the universe is very smooth, and (2) the geometries and physics of imperfections where there are fluctuations and squishy or quantum geometries within an idealized Euclidean base. Our constructions are formative and, in part, unprecedented.[4]

The nature of sleep cycles. Within sentient and thinking things, there is a constant process by which linear time is recompiled within exponential time and the current moment of the universe. Notation-202, the Now, is always on the edge of the current expansion, could appear to be a time asymmetry but is forever being recompiled within the whole as everything that sleeps does so within the continuity-symmetry-harmony of infinity.[5]

Summary. These points are evolving and have been part of prior homepages. You can click back through those homepages from our list or go up to the top navigation bar on this page and cursor over HOME and select from that pull-down menu. You could scroll through every homepage since July 2016.

To review these five points as a checklist, try these pages. Thank you. -BEC


These points have pages within this website.

* George Johnstone Stoney is the first scholar to craft these natural units (1874). His report was published in 1881. Planck’s calculations were done in 1899.

The horizontal chart was a natural extension of our very first chart in December 2011, called the Big Board Little Universe. It is all just simple math and geometry.

[1] Math and Universals. Those nine studies involve the finest living scholars within mathematics and science today. Yet, we all need to know the boundaries and parameters within which we work. Our simple mathematical boundaries begin with the symbolic placeholders that were calculated in 1899 by Max Planck and in 1874 by George Stoney. These natural units of space, time, mass, and charge are a start. Applying a basic function — doublings — to those numbers creates a continuity equation that brings us to the current time in just 202 notations. This outline is independent of any ontology or cosmology; and taken as a given, we have a parameter set unlike any. It is worth exploring, even if as a thought experiment.

Also, there is much more. There are people like Julian Barbour with his shape dynamics, Dennis Deutsch and Chiara Marletto with their constructor theory, and the moonshine outliers starting with John Conway and more recently with Miranda Cheng. Our simple theory works with them all. So, yes, there’ll be many more steps…

[2] Finite time. The name of the file for our first exploration of the nature of time was /time/. The definition of time with which we are now working is, “Time is an equation; it makes numbering possible. And as a result, it makes measurement possible.” It is continuity. It is the never-ending, never-repeating numbers of pi. Our perception is the passage of time; the general perception is clocks that tick-tock. The reality is that its always and in every way dynamic.

The very first equation gives us the circle and sphere, then tetrahedrons and octahedrons. The next equation begins to count the rate by which those infinitesimal spheres come to be. It is a “new cosmological constant” that can be calculated. Planck Time and Stoney Time give us a range between 539-to-4605 tredecillion infinitesimal spheres per second.

[3] Infinite: Continuity, symmetry, harmony. Also, redefine space; it’s tethered to time and light (Einstein’s equation) and necessarily to continuity-symmetry-harmony. These dynamic equations manifest as space. It is the actualization of symmetries. As a space-time moment, those equations also may be experienced as a most profound harmony and equally profound finite-infinite relation. Next steps

[4] Perfect-Imperfect. Specialized astrophysicists have concluded that the universe started very smooth, so smooth some scholars are suggesting that it is begging for a new physics. Our prediction is that as they peer either further away or back in time, they might even call that smoothness, perfection. Harvard’s Avi Loeb said, “If the anomaly in S8 and the Hubble constant stands the test of time, then both may imply new physics.”
Our Unexpectedly Smooth Universe May Point To New Physics, Govert Schilling, Sky & Telescope, July 31, 2020.

When we begin to acknowledge that it took 1800+ years to uncover Aristotle’s mistake, we know that we all make mistakes; we even repeat the mistakes of others, even the very best among us. One of the three key mistakes that science is making even today is to ignore that legacy of Aristotle. Gaps within basic geometries matter. Imperfection can be geometrical.

[5] Nature’s sleep. Do all living things sleep? Are all living things aware of a passage of time? Is there a sense of time? Among living things, all that which is organic, is there a group of just those that reflect on the past, dwell in the present, and project their future? Earlier I’ve placed all thinking living things in this group.

These are just a few of the questions with which we will be working. Thank you.


Editor’s note: As this posting begins receiving questions and feedback, these endnotes will be updated and extended; and, footnotes may be added. This is a working document.


References & Resources
As these references are studied, key references and resources will be added.within this website.

• Cycles of Time, Roger Penrose, Knopf, 2011. In this book, Penrose proposes his Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC) within the backdrop of the big bang cosmology. Our next step in our development will be to contrast the mathematically-integrated view of the universe with various cosmologies that have been proposed over the years. Penrose’s CCC is the first to be considered.

Our pivotal agreement is when he says, “The circular boundary itself represents infinity for this geometry (CCC), and it is this conformal representation of infinity as a smooth finite boundary…” (CoT, 2011, Knopf USA, page 67)

Penrose is now over 90 years old, yet still active, so it will be of interest to see if he responds to our note (also linked below).

• Our Unexpectedly Smooth Universe May Point To New PhysicsGovert Schilling, Sky & Telescope, July 31, 2020

• Khodadi, M., Nozari, K. & Hajkarim, F., On the viability of Planck scale cosmology with quartessenceEur. Phys. J. C 78, 716 (2018).

• Foundations of the new field theory, Max Born and Leopold Infeld, 29 March 1934.


There will be emails to many of our scholars about these five points.

• Who shall we write to next? Any suggestions?
Karen Keskulla Uhlenbeck, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ
Alexander F. Ritter, Associate Professor, University of Oxford, September 13, 2022
Valerie Jamieson, The Fusion Cluster, UKAEA, September 13, 2022 (update of Sept 6 email)
Matt Strassler, Center for Fundamental Laws of Nature, Harvard, Cambridge, MA, Sept. 12, 2022
Sir Roger Penrose, Oxford University, Oxford, UK, September 12, 2022
• Avi Loeb, Center for Astrophysics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, September 10, 2022
• Yair Shenfeld, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts USA September 7, 2022
(Questions about the geometry of gaps. Yair is an expert on Brownian motion.)


There will also be many instant messages to thought leaders about these five points.


Matt Strassler, a theoretical physicist, tweeted, “So, the news from #Kharkiv is surprisingly good, but very worrying. This is not retreat, it is collapse. (Izium, already!) #Putin cannot tolerate more humiliation. I fear he will lash out.”

9:16 AM · Sep 11, 2022 To which I replied, “You are right. The world needs to be giving him (Putin) off ramps everyday. Let’s get creative!


Participate. .. You are always invited.


Keys to this page, mathematical-universe

• This page became a homepage on September 9, 2022.
• The last update was September 24, 2022.
• This page was initiated on Wednesday, September 6, 2022.
• The URL for this file is
• The prior homepage: Challenged by the James Webb Space Telescope: What is space?…time?
• The headline for this article: Mathematically-Integrated UniverseView
• First byline is: On going from a worldview to an integrated view of our universe
Second: What’s your worldview? Does it absorb all space-time from the very start?
Third: Do you have a worldview? Wouldn’t an ordered UniverseView be better?
Fourth: Worldviews: Too vague. A well-ordered UniverseView: Liberating.
Fifth: Worldviews are incomplete. UniverseViews are inclusive and liberating.


JWST: Our first review of a JWST CEERS report

ArXiv: A dusty starburst masquerading as an ultra-high redshift galaxy in JWST CEERS observations (PDF), 121 authors (below), August 3, 2022

The James Webb Space Telescope is much anticipated paradigm shift that is happening as we speak.” -Bruce E. Camber

Background. In the efforts to understand galaxy formation and the difficulties within the process of galaxy counting, this report is being examined. The role of each of the 121 authors may be examined. The first author to be queried is Susan Kassin of the Space Telescope Science Institute, Galaxy Slice and Dice Group, in Baltimore, Maryland. STSI is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy and has been responsible for the Hubble Space Telescope and is now responsible for the data from the JWST. The Slice and Dice Group within the STSI understands some of the problems involved with properly identifying a galaxy as a galaxy. The head of the group is Dr. Susan Kassin and she is listed at #86.

  1. Jorge A. Zavala, Corresponding Author <jorgea.zavalas “AT”>
  2. Veronique Buat,
  3. Caitlin M. Casey
  4. Denis Burgarella
  5. Steven L. Finkelstein
  6. Micaela B. Bagley
  7. Laure Ciesla
  8. Emanuele Daddi
  9. Mark Dickinson
  10. Henry C. Ferguson
  11. Maximilien Franco
  12. E. F. Jim’enez-Andrade
  13. Jeyhan S. Kartaltepe
  14. Anton M. Koekemoer
  15. Aurélien Le Bail
  16. E. J. Murphy
  17. Casey Papovich
  18. Sandro Tacchella
  19. Stephen M. Wilkins;
    and The CEERS Team:
  20. Adriano Fontana
  21. Mauro Giavalisco
  22. Andrea Grazian
  23. Norman A. Grogin
  24. Lisa J. Kewley
  25. Dale D. Kocevski
  26. Allison Kirkpatrick
  27. Jennifer M. Lotz
  28. Laura Pentericci
  29. Pablo G. Perez-Gonzalez
  30. Nor Pirzkal
  31. Swara Ravindranath
  32. Rachel S. Somerville
  33. Jonathan R. Trump
  34. Guang Yang
  35. L. Y. Aaron Yung;
    And many others working within the CEERS domain:
  36. Omar Almaini
  37. Ricardo O. Amorin
  38. Marianna Annunziatella
  39. Pablo Arrabal Haro
  40. Bren E. Backhaus
  41. Guillermo Barro
  42. Peter Behroozi
  43. Eric F. Bell
  44. Rachana Bhatawdekar
  45. Laura Bisigello
  46. Fernando Buitrago
  47. Antonello Calabro
  48. Marco Castellano
  49. Oscar A. Chavez Ortiz
  50. Katherine Chworowsky
  51. Nikko J. Cleri
  52. 52.Seth H. Cohen
  53. Justin W. Cole
  54. Kevin C. Cooke
  55. M. C. Cooper
  56. Asantha R. Cooray
  57. Luca Costantin
  58. Isabella G. Cox
  59. Darren Croton
  60. Romeel Dave
  61. Alexander de la Vega
  62. Avishai Dekel
  63. Vicente Estrada-Carpenter
  64. David Elbaz,
  65. Vital Fernández
  66. Keely D. Finkelstein
  67. Jonathan Freundlich
  68. Seiji Fujimoto
  69. Ángela García-Argumánez
  70. Jonathan P. Gardner
  71. Eric Gawiser
  72. Carlos Gómez-Guijarro
  73. Yuchen Guo
  74. Timothy S. Hamilton
  75. Nimish P. Hathi
  76. Benne W. Holwerda
  77. Michaela Hirschmann
  78. Marc Huertas-Company
  79. Taylor A. Hutchison
  80. Kartheik G. Iyer
  81. Anne E. Jaskot
  82. Saurabh W. Jha
  83. Shardha Jogee
  84. Stéphanie Juneau
  85. Intae Jung,
  86. Susan A. Kassin<kassin “AT”>
  87. Peter Kurczynski
  88. Rebecca L. Larson
  89. Gene C. K. Leung
  90. Ray A. Lucas
  91. Benjamin Magnelli
  92. Kameswara Bharadwaj Mantha
  93. Jasleen Matharu
  94. Elizabeth J. McGrath
  95. Daniel H. McIntosh
  96. Aubrey Medrano
  97. Emiliano Merlin
  98. Bahram Mobasher
  99. Alexa M. Morales
  100. Jeffrey A. Newman, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, 3941 O’Hara St., Pittsburgh, PA 15260 (CV-PDF) janewman “AT”
  101. ArXiv limits the display to 100. There are these 21 more scholars. People like: David C. Nicholls,
  102. and Viraj Pandya. Please visit the ArXiv PDF for the other 19 authors.


The work of scholars studied:

  1. Gerald Holton
  2. Cumrun Vafa
  3. Lisa Randall
  4. Avi Loeb
  5. Howard Georgi
  6. Osama Siddique
  7. William Hugh Woodin
  8. Noam Elkies
  9. Rudolf Schild
  10. Marcus Ossiander
  11. Dudley R. Herschbach
  12. Drew Gilpin Faust

Visiting Scholars: Matt Strassler
Associate: Eriko Hironaka
Honorary research associate: Jan Struik

Long, long ago: Arthur Loeb, Howard Gardner, Arthur McGill, Stephen Jay Gould, Willard Van Orman Quine, and Hilary Putnam were all most special professors and acquaintances. I first met Steven Weinberg while he was on the faculty at Harvard.

Even longer ago, back in 1947 when I was born, my father was working in the HVAC group at Harvard and one of their activities was keep the rooms cool where the Mark I and then the Mark II were housed. Within that first year, I was smelling the air of the Mark II.

h]:Lonmttps: / /

On discovering the work of Mohsen Heidari…

Mohsen Heidari, Center for Science of Information (CSoI), Purdue
Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Indiana University Luddy
School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering
, Bloomington, Indiana

This page is:

ArXiv (13): Toward Physically Realizable Quantum Neural Networks, 2022
Google Scholar
Homepages: Github, IN
Publications (CV)
YouTube: Physically Realizable Quantum Algorithms, 2022

Acknowledgement: September 4, 2022

The answer: The Bloch sphere (Felix Bloch) specially rendered by artist, Jackie Niam.
Thank you, Mohsen!

First email: Thursday, Sep 1, 2:25 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Mohsen Heidari (CSoI, Purdue, and IU):

Is there an official attribution and explanation for this image on the right (and linked) associated with your May 24, 2022 workshop on Quantum Algorithms, Information, and Learning?




PS. It resonates with me. I may want to request permission to use it within our website on pages associated with a first principles quest:

Tweet: 1 September 2022 at 2:06 PM · Sep 1, 2022

Quantum Algorithms, Information, and Learning Workshop, May 24th, 9:30 – 4 (ET) Workshop aims to present the current solutions and key questions in quantum information and computation. Originally tweeted by Science of Information (@ScienceofInfo) on May 12, 2022.

Here is the substance of your tweet (Prof. Dr. Mohsen Heidari).

2:06 PM · Sep 1, 2022 “Excellent image. Has anyone interpreted it? We would love to know more!”

4:32 PM · Sep 1, 2022. TO: Mohsen Heidari: From your small-scale universe to our large-scale, there is scale invariance with dimensionless constants alone. That is SOI and a vision we should all share.

Is there an official attribution and explanation for the image associated with your May 24, 2022 workshop on Quantum Algorithms, Information, and Learning?






  1. Holly Krieger, University of Cambridge, Equidistribution and unlikely intersections in arithmetic dynamics, May 2020 Editor’s Note: Considering Blaschke visualizations within Bloch spheres
  2. An indestructible Blaschke product in the little Bloch space (PDF), Christopher Bishop, Publicacions Matematiques, 1993

More to come….


Supersymmetries (SUSY)

SUSY: Supersymmetries (most recent reference from within this website).

Although originating late in the 1960s with the studies of mesons and baryons and ongoing discussions about the homogeneity and isotropy of the universe.

As a formal study, SUSY began to build momentum in the early 1970’s with the work of Julius Wess and Bruno Zumino. We have written to Sylvester Gates, the first PhD granted at MIT for SUSY studies (1977). He is part of our first generation of scholars who engaged SUSY.

To continue to ask questions about SUSY, a list of scholars (with highly cited articles within the past few years) will be compiled here. For example, we are now reviewing the work of Jonathan Bagger of IAS, JHU, and APS.

From Wikipedia: “The observed hierarchy between the electroweak scale and the Planck scale must be achieved with extraordinary fine tuning. This problem is known as the hierarchy problem.”

There is no other theory that has 67 base-2 notations from the Planck scale to the electroweak scale. There is no hierarchy problem if one starts with IPS at Notation-0. even today, it might be argued that infinity, pi (π) and spheres (IPS) has nothing to do with supersymmetries. But, of course, within our model, IPS is the source of all symmetries

Wikipedia: Supersymmetries (SUSY)


Key references to this page from the following:
JWST Carina Nebula: Ontological and Cosmological Conundrums, Quick Read – Different Analysis

Challenged by the James Webb Space Telescope: What is space?…time?

A Different Analysis
JWST: Deeply Analyzed But Constrained *
by Bruce E. Camber, a working draft (under construction)

13.81 billion years and billions, maybe trillions, of galaxies

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) [1] is finding so many new galaxies, people are again asking, How is it possible? Are there too many galaxies and not enough time? Should we redefine time? Possibly there’s a better way to interpret the redshift data. [2] Perhaps we are unwittingly double-counting (or more). Is our understanding of galaxy formation too incomplete? What if this universe is fundamentally exponential? Could base-2 notation be a key to it all? [3]

Time redefined.
A dynamic equation that makes numbering possible

Einstein and others tell us that time is not absolute. It’s finite. Not to be confused with a second or some part of it, time is also dynamic. Time is an equation; it makes numbering possible. And as a result, it makes measurement possible. Seconds-minutes-hours-days are all human conventions. Simple equations make time, i.e. one infinitesimal sphere per unit of infinitesimal dimensionless constants and it all manifests as space-time. Time is the result of equations that render Planck units. Yet these current numbers are still just placeholders. NIST and the ISO could adjust those values. Even the 1874 calculations by Stoney could be used to help determine a new set of values based on current data.

Base-2 applied to the symbolic Planck units goes from the first possible moment of the universe to the current time in just 202 highly-integrated, richly-mathematical notations. It is no longer spaceship earth; it’s spaceship universe. We are intimately one; and, we create space-time as we go.

Redefine infinity, too.
Infinity is the perfection of continuity-symmetry-harmony.

The first notation opens the finite-infinite relation and the most logical manifestation is within pi. Here we find pi’s continuity, symmetry, and harmony which manifests as the finite-infinite, a quantitative-qualitative bond (relations and/or equations). Those three faces of pi create sphericals, and those geometries stack, create space, then together perfectly fill space by creating tetrahedral-octahedral packing based on symmetries-as-relations, then harmony-as-dynamics.

Imperfection — discontinuity, asymmetry and dissonance — comes.

Again, the domain encapsulated by the first groups of notations would be perfectly filled and smooth (no gaps) until there is a formation of the five tetrahedral and five octahedral gaps. A speculation is that due to compression (densities), these geometries would be encapsulated and not become systemic. We know, however, that at some point there comes a notation with encapsulated gaps that becomes systemic, giving rise to quantum fluctuations. And then, those fluctuations begin to reach down into the prior on-going notations (we’re beginning to learn how all notations are always active).

Perhaps a bit of functional analysis

Speculating further, it seems that functional analysis is a key to interpreting the first 64 notations and key intersections between the mathematics of (1) Langlands programs, (2) string theory (including M-Theory, F-theory, type II and offshoots), (3) supersymmetry (SUSY), (4) loop quantum gravity (LQG), (5) causal dynamical triangulation (CDT), (6) causal set theory (CST), (7) field theories, (8) spectral standard model (SSM), and (9) all the hypothetical particles. Of course, there are many thought leaders and dabblers (like me), working on the edges of our most seminal of scientific formulations. Some of the work of these folks will eventually be added.

We will all be learning key integral transforms! Eventually equations will no longer intimidate!

Ontological and Cosmological Openings

Concepts that could help open historic worldviews that confine us:

  • Simple mathematics. Looking at those 202 base-2 notations from the Planck base units to the current time, the first 64 notations are below thresholds of measurement and are the subject of the nine studies cited just above.
  • Redefine time. Newton’s concept of absolute time has been our common-sense worldview for about 300 years and the alternatives are not common sense. We can’t give up. We need to redefine time. It is a major hurdle for most of us. We can do it.
  • Finite-and-infinite. This Janus-faced relation has been controversial throughout time. Let’s define it as the quantitative-qualitative in light of those three faces of pi and in light of the first 64 notations. Historic and personal issues regarding infinity are placed on hold.
  • Perfection-imperfection. There has been a lack of engagement with (1) the geometries and physics of perfections, particularly of continuity-symmetry-harmony where there are no gaps, and (2) imperfections, where there are fluctuations (our constructions are all formative and being developed) and squishy or quantum geometries within an idealized Euclidean base.
  • The nature of sleep cycles. Within sentient and thinking things, there is a constant process by which linear time is recompiled within exponential time and the current moment of the universe. Notation-202, the Now, is always on the edge of the current expansion, could appear to be a time asymmetry but is forever being recompiled within the whole as everything that sleeps does within an infinite cradle of continuity-symmetry-harmony.

A hypostatic geometry, hypostatic physics, and hypostatic science

Of course, the word, hypostasis, is loaded with a prehistory that is not ignored, but could be. If today, right now, is the only time that is really real, it seems that we could engage the word as given within its meaning of “that which stands under” or perhaps “the foundations of the foundations.” It is about giving those first 64 notations a special name and definition. It’s a pre-physics that is still physics. It’s a most seminal geometry of nodes, lines and faces that are always dynamic, interactive, testing, defining, creating… and so much more. Scholars have spent their lifetime feeling, contexting, and writing about the subject. They each know a face of that mathematics. They have the textures and refinements. So, let us turn to them and ask, “Can you tell us more? Can you all work together? Might those five bullet-points just above help?”

Thank you (September 2022). -BEC

Editor’s note: Perhaps easier reading are the last few homepages about these issues:
• A simple model of our universe
Eight Concepts toward an Integrative Universe
The finite-infinite starting point is an infinitesimal sphere.


Endnotes & Footnotes
There may be more endnotes than footnote because all these points already have pages within this website.

* All these new images from the JWST, such as the Carina Nebula pictured above, enliven cosmology by bringing people out beyond our limited world, beyond our Solar System, into the Milky Way, into our Local Group, and even beyond into the Virgo Supercluster. The Carina Nebula is located in an arm of the Milky Way and is approximately 8,500 light-years from Earth. It all seems so vast and confusing until it is placed within the our 202 base-2 notations where our basic assumptions of space and time are challenged.

Please note: NASA’s image of the Carina Nebula can be explored more deeply by anyone online.

[1] James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) follows the work history of the Hubble Space Telescope. In 2016 Prof. Dr. Christopher Conselice defended a two-trillion galaxy estimate from his analysis of the Hubble data. He believed that number was consistent with big bang cosmology as understood by Stephen Hawking and his followers. Other respectable astrophysicists like Mario Livio (Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore) have not disputed the Conselice estimate but hold to a more conservative number between 100 and 200 billion. Notwithstanding, the JWST will continue to put pressure on that count and on the adequacies of classic big bang theories. Also, it will be anyone’s guess what is behind all the blindspots between us and the rest of the universe. The New General Catalogue of Nebulae and Clusters of Stars and other deep sky objects will become the largest document in the universe!

[2] Our understanding of the redshift (color, distance, frequency, light, time and wavelength) just might be challenged. We will start a pointed study of the redshift as currently understood.

[3] Counting within base-2. As noted in the prior homepage, just one sphere doubled, then doubled again and again, 64 times or 264 (our Notation-64) would amount to over 18,446 trillion infinitesimal spheres. At one second (as noted in just the prior paragraph of that homepage) is 539 tredecillion spheres per second. We have just scratched the surface in our quest to learn about exponential notation and all the possible counting schemas. The possibility of trillions of galaxies with quadrillions more planets has begun to peep into our spheres of plausibility.

Possibly more to come…


References & Resources
As these references are studied, key references and resources will be added within this website.

Longing for the Harmonies, Frank Wilczek and Betsy Devine, W. W. Norton, 1988
Editor’s note: More true today than at any time, Frank and Betsy’s dedication quote to Amity and Mira, sets the tenor of this book, “…awaken our understanding and longing for the harmonies” (which comes directly from Kepler).

Mapping the Heavens, Priyamvada Natarajan, Yale University Press, 2016
Editor’s note: The Cosmic Microwave Radiation provides the makings of a map of the universe and our abundance of space telescopes (Hubble, WMAP, and JWST being among the most well-known) provides the data. We rather timidly believe, however, that the most comprehensive map, from the first instant of the universe until this moment, is the one that we started in 2011 as a high school STEM project. An ordered set, continuous-but-discrete, fully-integrated within 202 notations, it truly is a very special outline to begin mapping the heavens.

Keith Cooper cites these articles as the first analysis of data from the JSWT:
1. Haojing Yan, Zhiyuan Ma, Chenxiaoji Ling, Cheng Cheng, Jia-Sheng Huang and Adi Zitrin, First Batch of Candidate Galaxies at Redshifts 11 to 20 Revealed by the James Webb Space Telescope Early Release Observations, 23 July 2022
2. C. T. Donnan, D. J. McLeod, J. S. Dunlop, R. J. McLure, A. C. Carnall, R. Begley, F. Cullen, M. L. Hamadouche, R. A. A. Bowler, H. J. McCracken, B. Milvang-Jensen, A. Moneti & T. Targett, The evolution of the galaxy UV luminosity function at redshifts z ‘ 8 – 15 from deep JWST and ground-based near-infrared imaging, 25 July 2022
3. Steven L. Finkelstein et al., A Long Time Ago in a Galaxy Far, Far Away: A Candidate z ∼ 14 Galaxy in Early JWST CEERS Imaging, 25 July 2022

And thousands of articles by thousands of scholars will follow. By August 3, 2022 dozens of articles were published, each by literally hundreds of scholars. A case in point is the consortium of 121 writers who published their JWST CEERS results detailing the difficulties in properly identifying a galaxy in our universe: A dusty starburst masquerading as an ultra-high redshift galaxy in JWST CEERS observations

There may be more to come...


Here are a few of the emails to scholars about these points.

Christopher J. Isham, emeritus, Imperial College London, UK, Wednesday, September 7, 2022
Fotini Markopoulou, NYC, Wednesday, September 7, 2022
Valerie Jamieson, The Fusion Cluster, Oxfordshire, UK, Tuesday, September 6, 2022
Susan Kassin, Galaxy Slice and Dice Group, STSI, Baltimore, Monday, September 5, 2022
Sarah A. Hart, Gresham College, Birkbeck College, London, September 4, 2022 at 4:33 PM
Helge Stjernholm Kragh, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, September 3, 2022
Evans M. Harrell II, Mathematics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, September 2, 2022
Mohsen Heidari, Center for the Science of Information, Purdue University, September 1, 2022
Jonathan Bagger, CEO, American Physical Society (APS), August 31, 2022
Sayan Mandal, Stony Brook, New York, August 31, 2022

Perhaps a few more will be added


There will also be many instant messages to thought leaders about these twelve points.

10:52 PM · Sep 4, 2022 @PhysicsWorld It is so obvious that there is so much we don’t know. It might be helpful to have it all in context vis-a-vis base-2 notation from the Planck units to this day. That gives us 202 notations within which to begin to parse deeper relations: JWST Carina Nebula – Ontological and Cosmological Conundrums

There is so much insecure arrogance in our world. One would think with all that we don’t know and all we learn every day about the depth and breadth of what we don’t know, well, wouldn’t you think we’d become a little more reflective and introspective.


You are always invited.


The keys to this page, analysis.

• This homepage began on August 27, 2022.
• The last update was September 9, 2022.
• This page was initiated on August 11, 2022.
• The URL for this file is
• The first headline for this article: Quick Read – A Different Analysis
• First byline is: JWST Carina Nebulae: Ontological and Cosmological Conundrum.
• Section 2: Redefine Time
• Section 3: Redefine infinity, too.
• Section 4: Perhaps a bit of functional analysis
• Section 5: Ontological and Cosmological Openings