Following the work of Indika Rajapakse…

Indika Rajapakse, University of Michigan

ArXiv: Mathematics of the Genome, Indika Rajapakse, Steve Smale
Much more to come… many more direct references.

Second email: 25 April 2022 at 3 PM

Dear Prof. Dr. Indika Rajapakse:

I am sure yesterday’s email seemed to come out nowhere. As I noted in the Subject line, I am looking in and around the first functions at the very beginning of the universe. Your work with Steve Smale within the Mathematics of the Genome — particularly attractor theory — just doesn’t appear out of nowhere. There are many similarities between your construct and our base-2, geometric construct of the universe. We unwittingly backed into it in 2011 and our discovery process for high school people has been a challenge. Is it meaningful that the universe is parsed in 202 base-2 notations? Is it meaningful to bring pi (π) into the picture that defines the first moment?

I believe so. When I recently discovered your work, it stimulated our postulations that the attractor and repellor manifest within the very first infinitesimal spheres.

Your work is very important to me so we are now following you:

Thank you for all that you do.



First email: Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 5:29 PM 

Dear Prof. Dr. Indika Rajapakse:

In our high school on December 19, 2011, we went inside a tetrahedron. Inspired by Zeno we kept going by dividing the edges by 2 and  connecting the new vertices. In 45 steps, we were within particle physics; in 67 additional steps we were in the Planck scale.

Using Planck Length for our edge, we multiplied by two, 112 times to return to the classroom and 90 additional times to go out to the approximate size of the universe. All tetrahedrons and octahedrons.

Eventually we added Planck Time, assumed it was the first moment, and in 202 steps we were going beyond 13.81 billion years.

It has base-2 notation and geometries. Is that enough to ask people of your caliber, “Is it a good model? Should we work with it?”

Thank you.

Most sincerely,