Eric Wolfgang Weisstein, MathWorld, Eric Weisstein’s World of Science,
Wolfram Research, Inc., 100 Trade Center Drive, Champaign, IL 61820-7237

CV
Homepage(s): MathWorld
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_W._Weisstein

Second email: 9 January 2020

RE: Planck Scale to the current Age of the Universe in 202 base-2 notations

Dear Dr. Eric Weisstein:

In December 2011, three teachers and about 90 students unwittingly opened a rather idiosyncratic door by naively following the embedded geometries of the tetrahedron and octahedron. We divided the edges by 2, connected the new vertices, and kept going further and further inside (on paper). Our initial model is on the web —  https://81018.com/tot/ — and is quite straightforward. On paper in 45 steps within, we were in the range of elementary particles. In another 67 within, we were in the range of the Planck scale. It seemed like the beginning of a nice STEM tool. We then began multiplying the edges of our desktop model by 2. In about 90 steps going out, we were in the range of the size and age of the universe. We began writing it up but quickly realized it was entirely idiosyncratic, no matter how logical or simple or mathematical.

It is very similar to the base-10 work that Kees Boeke did back in 1957. The difference is that we have an inherent geometry and a continuum from the smallest possible unit of time, Planck Time, to the current time, the Age of the Universe. If Planck Length and Planck Time are logically taken to be first moment of time, the progression becomes a natural inflation (with Planck Charge, Planck Mass and the speed of light within all the equations) and there is a natural homogeneity and isotropy.

Can you help us? What’s wrong with our chart?  What have we failed to understand?

Thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

 First email: Apr 22, 2017, 11:01 AM

Re: http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CoulombForce.html

Dear Dr. Eric Weisstein:

In a New Orleans high school we have been working with base-2 notation and simple geometries to tile and tessellate the universe. A fun exercise, we applied base-2 notation from the Planck Units and discovered many numbers that are difficult to grasp. The coulombs progression is particularly difficult for me to help interpret meaningfully for the students.

I hope you don’t mind a few naive questions. I’ll try to be succinct:
1. Is there a coulombs output rating of the sun? Does that make sense?
2. Is there a coulombs rating of the solar system? Does that make sense?
3. Is there a coulombs “guesstimate” for the galaxy? Does that make sense?

Thank you.

Most sincerely,

Bruce

_____