CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY•USA•GOALS•December 2018 HOMEPAGES: Intro|Infinity|Max|Weinberg|Review|Gravity|Dark|Assume|First 64|Emerge|ORIGINAL

If The Universe Starts At The Planck Scale…

by Bruce E. Camber Key Reference: Reformulating Space, Time, and Infinity Greeting: It’s 2019!

• Natural Inflation. This progression of the four Planck base units delineates a natural inflation and a thrust that mimics big bang cosmology.
• Each notation (doubling) defines a boundary; and, logic tells us that each is always active and never the same because of the dimensionless constants involved.
• The Now. Here is a fullness of time that is quantitative, derivative, and finite, so this model does not support absolute space and time.
• Max Planck’s formulas. In 1899 Max Planck redefined the basics.

• The sphere, it would seem, is the first manifestation of space-and-time-and-charge-mass.
• The first 67 doublings. Particularly, the first 64 doublings are all below the thresholds of physical measurement, yet these are all still very physical. Called a hypostatic domain, purely mathematical, it redefines the small-scale universe.

• Euler. The universe is fundamentally exponential. Euler’s identity is universal.
• In process: Each notation will be analyzed, notation by notation. It will be within this format this unified theory could possibly unfold. Wouldn’t the role of prime numbers be to determine when new mathematical systems can be introduced?

• Continuity. Order / numbers, first within the dimensionless constants, never-ending, never repeating, and then with the progression of spheres.
• Symmetry. Relations / Geometries, first with the symmetry of the spheres, then the symmetry within the tetrahedrons and octahedrons that are generated.
• Harmony. Dynamics / Space-time where two symmetries actively interact as a moment of space-time; it is a qualitative moment we experience as harmony.

Endnotes and Footnotes

¹ Questions. Asking evocative questions, one’s that make you think, is a talent that Socrates and good professors employ. The report from their Winter 2018 colloquium is a bit Socratic.

Challenge us. Coach us. We need all the help we can get.

Which concept is strongest? Which is weakest?

Key documents that were recently homepages:

November 4, 2018: No time for scientific elitism

An excellent resource to translate any of our pages by its URL:

http://itools.com/tool/google-translate-web-page-translator

If you liked this page and website, please do not hesitate to follow us on Twitter or Linkedin.

More References, Resources, and Research

The Principia

Though part of the intellectual debates about boundaries, going back 3000 years and more, our particular brand of it comes from Sir Isaac Newton, a point of view formalized in his 1687 book, generally known as The Principia.

If you look up into the heavens on a clear, crisp evening, it looks like it goes on forever. That’s Newton. Another person might say, “It goes just as far as the current expansion of the universe.” To which one of the kids quickly ask, “Well, what’s behind that?” To which I would reply, “infinity.” And, of course, that begs the question, “What’s infinity?”

Infinity is not an easy concept to grasp. As a recent college graduate in 1969, I remember asking myself, “How can we take religion out of infinity and make it more accessible to everyone?” The effort by scholars has become a formal discipline called renormalization. And like so much of scholarship, it is not easy for regular people to understand. Even scholars have problems with it. Freeman Dyson worked on it back in 1949 and more recently, Steven Weinberg re-formalized it in 1986. Infinity is such a character, it needs to be corralled so the work of mathematicians and physicists can go on. Of course, it can’t be corralled, but it can appear to be tamed enough to carry on one’s work without getting bitten too badly.

Physicists developed this means to avoid engaging the concept of infinity, then they made that work an art form, and then a fine science unto itself. Initially called renormalization, the process began in earnest with KG Wilson: “His work in physics involved formulation of a comprehensive theory of scaling: how fundamental properties and forces of a system vary depending on the scale over which they are measured. He devised a universal divide-and-conquer strategy for calculating how phase transitions occur, by considering each scale separately and then abstracting the connection between contiguous ones, in a novel appreciation of renormalization group theory.

Max Planck

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather… science advances one funeral at a time.” – Max

• Living With Infinities, Steven Weinberg: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0903.0568.pdf
• https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.0568

The Net Advance of Physics: RENORMALIZATION

• • http://web.mit.edu/redingtn/www/netadv/Xrenormali.html
  • Baez: “…assume you vaguely know what a Lagrangian for a quantum field theory looks like.” http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/renormalization.html
  • Feynman, QED: Strange Theory of Matter and Light: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QED:_The_Strange_Theory_of_Light_and_Matter
  • A Quantum Pioneer Unlocks Matter’s Hidden Secrets by Elizabeth Gibney (Nature, Sept. 2017): “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.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_George_Lonzarich

• On the Revolutions of the Internal Spheres:A New Theory of Matter and the Transmission of Light, K. Troy.
• https://81018.com/derivative/
• An infinite number of symmetry groups are possible within the first-64 notations.
• key conceptual transitions https://81018.com/beyond/ https://81018.com/overview/
• https://81018.com/functions/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growing_block_universe
• Michael Tooley (in 1997) and Peter Forrest (in 2004).
• Tooley, Michael (1997). Time, Tense, and Causation (pdf). Oxford University Press. ISBN ;9780198235798.
• Bourne, Craig (2002). “When am I?”. Australasian Journal of Philosophy. ;80 (3): 359–71. doi:10.1080/713659472. hdl:2299/8627.
• Braddon-Mitchell, David (2004). “How do we know it is now now?”. Analysis. 64 (283): 199–203. doi:10.1111/j.0003-2638.2004.00485.x.
• Forrest, Peter (2004). “The real but dead past: a reply to Braddon-Mitchell”. Analysis. 64 (284): 358–62. doi:10.1111/j.0003-2638.2004.00510.x.
• Merricks, Trenton (2006). Zimmerman, Dean, ed. Good-Bye Growing Block (pdf). Oxford Studies in Metaphysics. 2. Oxford University Press. p. 103. ISBN 9780199290598.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growing_block_universe
• External Links: https://www.iep.utm.edu/time/ (excellent references at the end) Bradley Dowden, California State University, Sacramento

***