ArXiv (68): S. Alexander, On a Relation of Vacuum Energy to the Hierarchy of Forces, 2017; Predictions of the Quantum Landscape Multiverse, 21 Dec 2016
Homepage(s): CV, UNC, Practicum: AN ORIGIN STORY (January 23, 2019), Twitter, Wikipedia
Video (Bing): Youtube: How did the Universe Begin? Big Bang Creation Myths (Dec. 2018)
Closer to truth
References within this website:
1. Homepage in February 2019: https://81018.com/key-question/
2. Reference within emails (with Stephon Alexander)
3. Planck scale to quantum fluctuations: https://81018.com/conference/
4. Homepages: https://81018.com/key-question/ … https://81018.com/questions-1/
Most recent note: 26 September 2022 at 12:05 PM
The model. There are a total of 202 base-2 notations that go from the first moment of time until today. It is 100% mathematical. 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. And, every 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 equivalent multiple of it).
Our plan of action for our base-2 model is to come up alongside any big bang problem to see how our quiet expansion might address it. 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.”
The first minute is everything. In our model the first second (Notations 143-144), even a zeptosecond, is everything!
Second email: 29 January 2019 at 9:30 AM
Dear Prof. Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton:
My prior email back in October 2017 (below) was as a result of reading your ArXiv article referenced above with Stephon Alexander of Brown. Since that time, I have had several occasions to read more from your unique perspective.
One of the reasons I was initially attracted to Alexander’s work was the simplicity of his logic. It stood out because in the face of big cosmology, he said that it all either started hot, as with the Planck Temperature, or it started cold as in zero temperature. That was uncharacteristic within the halls of physics. Most had already defaulted to the Lucasians, Newton and Hawking.
We are waiting for some scholar with the depth and range that you have to explain why our simple logic of a very cold start and a natural inflation can not work. The numbers generated from simple doublings tell a story that seems to track well with big bang cosmology, yet gives us a very special kind of data that goes well behind what some are calling the epoch of reionization.
Since we can’t get behind that period, why not look at the simple data generated by logic, a cold start, and simple doublings? If it can be pulled into harmony with CMBR measurements, then I think it should be looked at even more closely.
It is not totally crazy if there is some possibility of seeing all these puzzle pieces rather differently.
First email: Oct 30, 2017, 8:21 PM
Thank you, Prof. Dr. Stephon Alexander and Prof. Dr. Laura Houghton-Mersini:
I’ve gone through your September 1, 2017 article and have highlighted several spots, particularly, in the microphysical scale. If you begin at the Planck units and use base-2, you’ll have those 64-to-67 doublings to the CERN scale which define the very-very early universe. Between the 143rd and 144th doubling the universe is just a second and the length is the distance light travels in a second. https://81018.com/chart/ At the 197th we are within our first 500 million years and at the 202 we are now emergent within the Age of the Universe today.
That simple math and simple logic, of course, is too simple for most. You may be surprised, once you are inside those domains, how complex and open it all is.
Thanks again for your article.