First email regarding this work: Monday, November 24, 2014, 10:20 AM
RE: Three cheers for Gravitational Wave Detectors!
Dear Prof. Dr. Kip Thorne:
And, “Thank you for your work with Interstellar!”
We are a high school geometry class and we are looking for some guidance, even a good head slap might be helpful. We are off in a never-never land of speculations based on the simplest mathematics and geometries, yet nobody is willing to set us straight. Everybody is polite. The “harshest” thing anybody has said, “Idiosyncratic.”
That told us a little, but not enough to stop; we persevere because it is fascinating.
We started with a tetrahedron (studying the Platonic solids) divided each edge in half, connected those vertices, found the octahedron inside, along with the four smaller tetrahedrons. So we proceeded with both objects, dividing in half, over and over again. In about 50 notations we were somewhere around the size of a fermion or proton. In about 65 more steps we were looking at the Planck Length.
We multiplied our original objects by two. Very quickly, we were out to the Observable Universe. That was all very cool and a lot of fun. We had some help to figure somewhere between 202-to-205+ notations or doublings. We then learned about Kees Boeke and it seems that we unwittingly caught his spirit but we had added three or four more steps within each of his 40 notations and then discerned that he should have had about 62 steps or “jumps” as he called them. But most importantly, we added the simple geometry and a natural doubling, a progression that is found within bonding and growth.
That was December 2011. Now, are we crazy? Is this just over-simplistic poppycock? Of course, we would be honored with your quick or measured response. Thanks.
(aka Uncle Bruce, an occasional substitute teacher
for the kids’ regular geometry teacher)
PS. Possibly the tightest little summary of our nearly three years of sporadic work is here: https://81018.com/2012/01/08/simple/
Update (2019): https://81018.com/transformation/