Why now?

Why haven’t we seen this model until now?

by Bruce Camber, July 4, 2017 Most-recent update: March 2022

Planck Base Units: These four are “…properties of nature and not from any human construct.” Yet, these Planck numbers did not always command basic respect within the entire academic and scientific community. Not until 2001 when Frank Wilczek (MIT, Nobel laureate, 2004) began writing a series of three articles for Physics Today (Scaling Mt. Planck, I, II, III), did these Planck units begin to move beyond Dirac-like numerology into wide-scale acceptability.

By 2001, big bang cosmology had the higher ground and it hides Planck’s base units.

Also, nobody thought the concepts of continuity and symmetry were more fundamental than time and space. Nobody thought to follow simple nested or combinatorial geometries back to the Planck Length. Nobody thought to multiply those Planck units by 2, and every result by 2, over and over again, until in 202 steps we are out beyond the current time and size of the universe. It took a huge amount of naïveté and almost no knowledge of cosmological models to bias those early exploratory instincts. It also required discounting Isaac Newton who gave us our commonsense worldview; that is absolute space and time. We unwittingly engaged a more relational model, suggested in 1715 by Leibniz, and our raw numbers of this chart emerged.

Totally predictive, it should be a relatively straightforward process to affirm or discount this model. To date, signs point in the direction of affirmation!

Also, because this work was introduced on the web early in 2012 and we’ve asked many leading scholars through emails, tweets, and telephone calls,  and nobody has said, “You’re wrong” — we have begun to assume that we are on a path with potential and that the big bang’s “infinitely hot” is not the best path. We began to question the big bang’s logic in 2014.

If you can help us in any way to better understand what we are doing, I thank you.  –BEC

For more:
• Always check the homepage: https://81018.com/
• Newton’s absolute space and time is not necessary.
• Our simple little model doesn’t fit in with current thinking or theory
• Maybe we are too hung up on particles: https://81018.com/maybe
• Three overviews of all the articles: Homepages, Index, Table of Contents
• Five Initial Reasons To Believe: https://81018.com/reasons
• Continuity is continuity: https://81018.com/introduction
• Symmetry is symmetry: https://81018.com/symmetry
• Measuring An Expanding Universe Using Planck Units https://81018.com/planck_universe/
• The Thrust of the Universe: What is it?  Resources https://81018.com/thrust/
• Visualizing the Universe https://81018.com/visualizations/