• Center for Perfection Studies • The Big Board–Little Universe Project New Orleans • USA • 2017 •
Homepages: Just Prior | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18| Original
Yet, breaking free of little worldviews is not easy.
by Bruce Camber (Your comments are always welcomed.)
Our universe may not be quite as mysterious as the academic and scientific communities currently think it is. Our simple mathematical model of the universe  uses base-2 exponentiation to encapsulate it within just over 202 notations. This model opens a simple-logical-mathematical path to an integrated view of the Universe. Like a worldview, we’ve called it our Universe View, as well as a Quiet Expansion and the Big Board-little universe. Is it silly? …insightful? …confusing? To date, the academic community has not helped us very much. Either they do not know what to debunk, or they might be afraid that they’d be debunking a model that could be more true than false.
On Monday, December 19, 2011, high school geometry students focused on a simple exponential progression using base-2 notation that went from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe . That means the Planck Length was multiplied by 2 over and over and over again. Each new number created a new notation of a specific length creating a range between each. The initial idea was to place anything with a measurable length into the notation closest in size. That was our first rough-but-comprehensive chart to order the universe by length. It was magical. 
The human egg was readily contained within notation 103. Sperm, much smaller, went into into notation 100. People emerged at 116. By 134th notation we were out to the International Space Station, between 206-to-270 miles away when it is overhead. But then, we were sure we did something wrong. Based on the most recent measurements from the Hubble Space telescope, we only had to multiply the results from the Planck Length just over 67 more times to get to the size of the observable universe.
What!?! How can the universe be inscribed by just over 201 notations? We had a lot to learn about base-2 notation!
We were dumbfounded to find nothing on the web about this continuity equation. The closest work was done in 1957 in Holland by a secondary school teacher, Kees Boeke.  His base-10 work was a real universe view, but he identified only forty of the 62-to-63 possible notations.  He had no inherent geometry and did not use the Planck units. Yet, his work gave us a little hope. Somebody else had already been out on these waters. Still it took us three years to gain some confidence to feel that this path was not a dead end.
In 2014 we added Planck Time.  In 2015, we added the other Planck base units.  When we began to find the epochs of big bang cosmology  within our numbers, we knew something important was happening. To make it easier to analyze the flow of those numbers, in April 2016 we initiated our horizontally-scrolled chart. Now we could readily see a natural inflation, especially within the first second of the life of this universe which brought us all the way to notation 143. 
We had a sweet, little mathematical model of the universe. It was so simple-yet-comprehensive, it seemed worthy of our continued investigation so we’ve asked for help. Yet, it must have been too big a jump for people who had been schooled on big bang theories. Nobody said, “Let’s explore this further.” We did hear, “Idiosyncratic.” “Just a novelty.” . . (Continued next column)
Something was “right” about this work and our little model. It was logical. It was mathematical. It included all time and all space. Simple-but-complex, it was an elegant, even a beautiful structure within which to explore the universe.
Over the years, we have emerged with four thrusts, directions or faces for our research: (1) Numbers, (2) Key Ratios, (3) Key Relations: Continuity, Symmetry & Harmony, and (4) Foundations, a pre-particle world of 67 small-scale notations.
 The Chart of Planck Base Units Extended Through Base-2 Notation. All our charts are still very early developments. The horizontally-scrolled chart is out most comprehensive and most-recently updated.
 In March 2012, an article prepared for Wikipedia opened a pointed discussion with scholars who claimed it was “original research” and that it had not been done before now. The similarities with Kees Boeke’s scientific notation and scale of the universe were interesting as a way to understand , just on its face, an integrated universe view.
 Also in March 2012, base-2 and base-10 are compared.
 In December 2014 Planck Time was added to the chart. Here for the first time we began to engage the concept that the universe is just over one second old at the 143rd notation and the scientific community had not yet considered the first 60+ steps of that expansion.
 In February 2015 the other Planck base units were added to the chart . A decision was made to put the Planck Temperature one notation higher than the current time and divide by 2 back to the Planck Length and Planck Time. In other words, we would put it on hold believing that everything starts simply.
 In June 2016 the big bang theory and its cosmogony-cosmology were studied more closely. With that analysis it became increasingly clear that the big bang was not necessary and that the theory, like Newton’s concepts of space and time, had truncated the creativity of scholarly thinking.
 In April 2016 with the horizontally-scrolled chart, it was easier to follow the inherent logic of this natural inflation.
|News / Research
• Open Letter to the editors of Science (magazine) of the American Association for the Advancement of Science
• Stephen Hawking Abused
• Simple View of the UniverseQuietExpansion.com opens for business: There are many websites associated with these efforts. Most attempt to capture historical moments in time and to analyze its possible role within academic work. There hasn’t been a place for personal reflections.That has changed; QuietExpansion.com is the personal side.Universe View: What is your expertise? There are many blanks within many cells — over 2000 of them in the entire chart — so, we assume it will always be “under construction.”