Electroweak, too. Information gathering.

Regularization (in physics), Renormalization, renormalization group, zeta function

By analyzing the answers of experts in light of this base-2 exponential notation model, we discover…

Renormalization specifies relationships between parameters in the theory when the parameters describing large distance scales differ from the parameters describing small distances. Physically, the pileup of contributions from an infinity of scales involved in a problem may then result in infinities. When describing space and time as a continuum, certain statistical and quantum mechanical constructions are ill-defined. To define them, this continuum limit—the removal of the “construction scaffolding” of lattices at various scales—has to be taken carefully, as detailed below. Renormalization procedures are based on the requirement that certain physical quantities are equal to the observed values.”

One of its fundamental aspects was the prediction of the existence of the Higgs boson.

“The W bosons are named after the weak force.  Weinberg named the additional particle the “Z particle”,[3] and later gave the explanation that it was the last additional particle needed by the model. The W bosons had already been named, and the Z bosons have zero electric charge.[4]

“The two W bosons are verified mediators of neutrino absorption and emission. During these processes, the W boson charge induces electron or positron emission or absorption, thus causing nuclear transmutation. The Z boson is not involved in the absorption or emission of electrons and positrons.

Weinberg’s model, now known as the electroweak unification theory, had the same symmetry structure as that proposed by Glashow in 1961: hence both models included the then-unknown weak interaction mechanism between leptons, known as neutral current and mediated by the Z boson.

The 1973 experimental discovery of weak neutral currents [Haidt, D. (2004). “The discovery of the weak neutral currents”. CERN Courier] (mediated by this Z boson) was one verification of the electroweak unification. The paper by Weinberg in which he presented this theory is one of the most cited works ever in high energy physics.[16]

Electroweak interaction
In particle physics, the electroweak interaction is the unified description of two of the four known fundamental interactions of nature: electromagnetism and the weak interaction. Although these two forces appear very different at everyday low energies, the theory models them as two different aspects of the same force. Above the unification energy, on the order of 100 GeV, they would merge into a single electroweak force. Thus, if the universe is hot enough (approximately 1015 K, a temperature exceeded until shortly after the Big Bang), then the electromagnetic force and weak force merge into a combined electroweak force. During the electroweak epoch, the electroweak force separated from the strong force. During the quark epoch, the electroweak force split into the electromagnetic and weak force.

Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg were awarded the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics for their contributions to the unification of the weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles.[1][2] The existence of the electroweak interactions was experimentally established in two stages, the first being the discovery of neutral currents in neutrino scattering by the Gargamelle collaboration in 1973, and the second in 1983 by the UA1 and the UA2 collaborations that involved the discovery of the W and Z gauge bosons in proton–antiproton collisions at the converted Super Proton Synchrotron.

In 1999, Gerardus ‘t Hooft and Martinus Veltman were awarded the Nobel prize for showing that the electroweak theory is renormalizable.

The Electroweak Epoch Requires A Temperature of 2×1012 Kelvin to create the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP). And, it appears that requires 175 MeV per particle. That temperature is reached between notations 136 and 137. The universe is less than one-hundredth of second from its start.

The Electroweak Epoch will also be downgraded from an epoch to a transition process. Given its temperature requirements it is guessed to begin between notations 136 and 137. The Quark Epoch should begin soon thereafter.. It is up for grabs. Much more anhttps://bbludata.wordpress.com/43-48/alysis is required. We will be using the temperature requirements of the big bang theorists to determine some of these placements.


In the 1980s, he was a pioneer in the theory of elektroweak baryogenesis. In 1985, his influential work with Valery Rubakov and Mikhail E. Shaposhnikov estimated the rate of anomalous electroweak process that violated baryon-number conservation in the cosmic plasma of the early universe.[1]

Yet, to be sure we are all on the same page, the universe is still so young, we have no instrumentation to measure such a short duration. Our first measurement of a duration will not happen until Notation 84.

In the QE model time is discrete quantized, and locally defined BY-AND-WITHIN ITS NOTATION. It will be among the most difficult definitions to explain and it may take many successive approximations over several years.

Grand Unification and the Electroweak Epochs renamed Processes: Based on the fact that entities and things require a necessary amount of space that only becomes available from the 67th notation and above, the first 60 to 66 notations are foundational to all notations. Using the analogy of the birthing process, all the forms-and-functions, then processes-and-procedures, and then relations-and-systems prior to the actual birthing event, are the first 60 or so notations. Here that finite-infinite relation creates the foundational order, the most basic relations, and many dynamical systems. Using the analogue of a birthing event will be further explored. Metaphors are a most fundamental educational tool grounded within homogeneity and isotropy.

We postulate that the Grand Unification processes continue beyond the 67th notation as specific unification processes. A kind of de facto unification continues within all the ratios, even though there are now truly entitive manifestations which are most often best described by the big bang theorists.

Electroweak processes: Now the heat requirements will determine when these processes begin to manifest and the measurements given by the big bang theorists can then be tweaked and integrated within the Quiet Expansion model. The analysis begins within the notational cluster from 133 to 138.



Howard Mason Georgi III (born January 6, 1947) is an American theoretical physicist and the Mallinckrodt Professor of Physics and Harvard College Professor at Harvard University.[1] He is also Director of Undergraduate Studies in Physics and has been Co-Master of Leverett House with his wife, Ann Blake Georgi, since 1998. His early work was in Grand Unification and gauge coupling unification within SU(5) and SO(10) groups (see Georgi–Glashow model).

Unparticle physics is a theory that there exists matter that cannot be explained in terms of particles, because its components are scale invariant. Howard Georgi proposed this theory in the spring of 2007 in the papers “Unparticle Physics” and “Another Odd Thing About Unparticle Physics”.[3][4]

The acronym GUT was first coined in 1978 by CERN researchers John Ellis, Andrzej Buras, Mary K. Gaillard, and Dimitri Nanopoulos, however in the final version of their paper[4] they opted for the less anatomical GUM (Grand Unification Mass). Nanopoulos later that year was the first to use[5] the acronym in a paper.[6]

“As Steven Weinberg tells the story, there was Isaac Newton’s theory of gravity, ‘intended to explain the movements of the celestial bodies and how such things as apples fall to the ground; and there was James Clerk Maxwell’s account of electromagnetism as a way to explain light, radiation, magnetism, and the forces that operate between electrically charged particles.'” The quantum revolution “introduced two new forces, both operating at very short range, within the nucleus of the atom. The strong force holds the particles of the nucleus together and is very strong… The other is known as the weak force, which is responsible for radioactive decay. And so, until the 1960s there were four forces that needed to be reconciled: gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak radioactive force” (Peter Watson, The Modern Mind).

At Berkeley in 1967, “Weinberg produced a gauge theory that correctly predicted electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces. This was later to become known as the electroweak theory. In his paper, ‘A model of leptons’, he showed that although electromagnetism is much stronger than the weak force of everyday energies, the only way to devise a theory of the weak force is to include the electromagnetic force. Weinberg showed how what was seemingly impossible could be achieved and the forces could be unified through the interchange of particles in spite of the difference in their strengths. Abdus Salam had independently reached the same conclusions and what became known as the Weinberg-Salam model was a major advance on earlier models that had originally been applied to leptons… In 1979 Weinberg shared the Nobel Prize for Physics for this work with Salam and his old school friend Sheldon Glashow, who had extended the work that Weinberg and Salam had independently developed” (Chris Cooper, Physics).

The discovery and description of the electroweak force has been confirmed experimentally and now is one of the essential elements of the “standard model” of particle physics. “By 1988, Weinberg’s three-page paper in the Physical Review was the most frequently cited paper in elementary particle physics since the end of World War II” (Lightman, The Discoveries). Particle Physics: One Hundred Years of Discoveries; Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe

The great debate between defining notions of space and time as real objects themselves (absolute), or mere orderings upon actual objects (relational), began between physicists Isaac Newton (via his spokesman, Samuel Clarke) and Gottfried Leibniz in the papers of the Leibniz–Clarke correspondence.

Arguing against the absolutist position, Leibniz offers a number of thought experiments with the purpose of showing that there is contradiction in assuming the existence of facts such as absolute location and velocity. These arguments trade heavily on two principles central to his philosophy: the principle of sufficient reason and the identity of indiscernibles. The principle of sufficient reason holds that for every fact, there is a reason that is sufficient to explain what and why it is the way it is and not otherwise. The identity of indiscernibles states that if there is no way of telling two entities apart, then they are one and the same thing.

The example Leibniz uses involves two proposed universes situated in absolute space. The only discernible difference between them is that the latter is positioned five feet to the left of the first. The example is only possible if such a thing as absolute space exists. Such a situation, however, is not possible, according to Leibniz, for if it were, a universe’s position in absolute space would have no sufficient reason, as it might very well have been anywhere else. Therefore, it contradicts the principle of sufficient reason, and there could exist two distinct universes that were in all ways indiscernible, thus contradicting the identity of indiscernibles.

Standing out in Clarke’s (and Newton’s) response to Leibniz’s arguments is the bucket argument: Water in a bucket, hung from a rope and set to spin, will start with a flat surface. As the water begins to spin in the bucket, the surface of the water will become concave. If the bucket is stopped, the water will continue to spin, and while the spin continues, the surface will remain concave. The concave surface is apparently not the result of the interaction of the bucket and the water, since the surface is flat when the bucket first starts to spin, it becomes concave as the water starts to spin, and it remains concave as the bucket stops.

In this response, Clarke argues for the necessity of the existence of absolute space to account for phenomena like rotation and acceleration that cannot be accounted for on a purely relationalist account. Clarke argues that since the curvature of the water occurs in the rotating bucket as well as in the stationary bucket containing spinning water, it can only be explained by stating that the water is rotating in relation to the presence of some third thing—absolute space.

Leibniz describes a space that exists only as a relation between objects, and which has no existence apart from the existence of those objects. Motion exists only as a relation between those objects. Newtonian space provided the absolute frame of reference within which objects can have motion. In Newton’s system, the frame of reference exists independently of the objects contained within it. These objects can be described as moving in relation to space itself. For many centuries, the evidence of a concave water surface held authority.

Introduce a new Lagrangian based on simple logic, simple numbers and simple geometries.

All point to quiet expansion model.

If in some manner verifiable, the first 67 notations could become a new field of study that we are calling, hypostatic studies, from perfections to imperfections and symmetry breaking.

We’ll take this nice and slow because we are going to be making some rather unusual statements.

But, this chart is different; every notation seems to define a current domain of activity and there is nothing historical or past; it is an active imprint within a current notation and it helps define the universe as it is.But, this chart is different; every notation seems to define a current domain of activity and there is nothing historical or past; it is an active imprint within a current notation and it helps define the universe as it is.

Discrete space-time, Rodolfo Gambini, Jorge Pullin
“…construct gravitational theories on discrete space-times, usually referred to as the “consistent discretization” approach.” https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0505023

Thomas Campbell, former a physicist at NASA claims space time to be granular.

Carlo Rovelli, Zakopane lectures on loop gravity, introductory lectures on loop quantum gravity (LQG). August 4, 2011

Our working premise begins with what is known as a space-time singularity, the dynamic transformation nexus between the finite and infinite where there is a complete unification of all the forces of nature, i.e. the Planck base units (aka Planck scale). We postulate that this unification is extended through dynamic working ratios throughout all 200+ notations from the first moment of creation to the current time and present day.

The key to the QE: More than just the bbt’s four forces of nature within the Planck scale, we assume these four are encapsulated within all five Planck base units and the constants that define them, and that this unification is carried through all 201+ notations. And, as we have noted, the Planck base units are defined by length, time, mass, temperature and charge; and, these are further defined by the speed of light (or special relativity), the gravitational constant (or general relativity), the reduced Planck constant (or ħ or quantum mechanics), the Coulomb constant (or ε0 or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or kB or of temperature).

The Planck Epoch

Most recent update: August 2016
by Bruce Camber, New Orleans

The Working HypothesisThe Planck base units also known as the  gravitational or space-time singularity  is the dynamic transformational nexus between the finite and infinite where there is a complete unification of all the forces of nature, i.e. the Planck base units (aka Planck scale). We postulate that this unification is extended through dynamic working ratios throughout all 200+ notations from the first moment of creation to the current time and present day. We further postulate that this working premise creates an environment to build a panoply of bridges from the Planck scale to all current physical theories whereby each notation is a domain for unique predictive values.  To test this hypothesis and these postulations, base-2 notation is applied and the unique numbers of each Planck base unit are charted to include every space — everything everywhere — and every time from the first moment of creation to this moment this day. There are over 1000 numbers and hundreds of thousands of ratios  to analyze.

We call this model the Quiet Expansion (QE) and quiet expansion cosmology.

Wikipedia, representing today’s big bang cosmology, says that the Planck epoch  requires speculative proposals, a “New Physics” such as “…the Hartle–Hawking initial state, string landscape, string gas cosmology, and the ekpyrotic universe.” Each is a conceptually-rich, dense jungle of ideas. Cutting through that entanglement is only for the highly-motivated and academically astute. Most of us will just go on to the grand unification epoch, in search of a logical system that builds consistently upon itself.

More than just the bbt‘s four forces of nature within the Planck scale, we assume these four are encapsulated within all five Planck base units defined by length, time, mass, temperature and charge; and, these are further defined by the speed of light (or special relativity), the gravitational constant (or general relativity), the reduced Planck constant (or ħ or quantum mechanics), the Coulomb constant (or ε0 or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or kB or of temperature).

All are bound within this Planck scale; and, herein it is proposed to be the foundations for a highly-ordered, totally-relational universe.

What is time? What is space? What is finite? What is infinite? Was Sir Isaac Newton or Gottfried Leibniz correct about it all?

The key to our model is multiplication by 2, starting with the Planck base units. A nexus of transformation between the finite and the infinite is defined by the crossing lines at “0” within the image on the right.

Most all of the work done since 1975 to promulgate the big bang theory (bbt) can be quickly absorbed within the QE. Our primary questions are about the first four and most fundamental periods which are call “Epochs” within the bbt. Taken together, these four epochs represent less than a fraction-of-a-fraction of a second within the QE model. With just little tweaks, we believe most all their work within the subsequent epochs can be readily integrated.

Although technically the Planck Epoch should be just the first notation (#1) we will initially be asking, “Could it be more than just the “0” notations? Why ? Why not?  The Grand Unification Epoch will range from Notations 1 to 60 and possibly as high as 67.

Planck Epoch renamed Planck Moment: The finite-infinite relation most intimately defines the first notation and is necessarily within all notations building from the first. An infinitesimal duration, it is the beginning that creates space and time and then extends within space and time much like the birthing process. As of today, the Planck base units are our simplest-deepest-best description of this moment.

Within the bbt the Planck epoch is still mysterious. It is a weak initial condition and foundation for a theory.  Plus, many say that it is bad psychology for that very reason. It is so disjointed, so out of touch with anything human, it <em>de facto</em> promotes a certain form of nihilism.


Most recent update: August 2016
Approaching a first draft. Data collection and analysis is ongoing.*

Introduction: The Big Bang Electroweak Epoch-and-Processes in Light of the Quiet Expansion

Let’s map the universe using base-2 notation.


Within cosmology the concept of an Electroweak Epoch implies a beginning and endpoint. Although it follows the Planck Epoch, the Grand Unification Epoch, and the Inflationary Epoch, it is the first “epoch” of the big bang theory (bbt) with concepts that can be researched and tested; it is not solely extracted from informed speculations. Because the actual dynamics of electroweak processes can be replicated within CERN laboratory in Geneva, any new results of current research becomes a major global event. That data is shared as quickly as possible with literally hundreds-of-thousands of our finest thinkers around the world who begin to analyze the data, ponder the implications, and attempt to incorporate that data within their own research.

But, what if our understanding of the first three epochs is wrong? What if there wasn’t a big bang but a quiet expansion of the Planck base units to the first instants of physicality?

This rather idiosyncratic, naive idea is based on the simple math and simple logic of the Big Board-little universe (BB-lu) project and the Quiet Expansion (QE). Those of us who are exploring the BB-lu and QE would be the first to say, “It’s so simple, it’s simplistic.”

But, maybe not.

It seems that the electroweak processes can be even more pointedly studied and tested when examined within the numbers of the BB-lu and QE base-2 chart. The entire chart just might inform the coincidence problem — the nature of the vacuum, and the distribution of matter (including baryon and neutrino) and radiation energy densities throughout our Universe. That is, it just might inform dark energy and dark matter.

Although the bbt concept of an epoch is quite fluid, it still begs the question, “Is there any logic that can be applied to determine if and when there is an endpoint of those processes that could constitute an epoch?” At this stage in our studies, it seems that electroweak processes will be seen and understood as a continuing process rather than an epoch.

The big bang theorists have given two different starting point ranges. The first, based on time, is between 10−12 second (Notations 104-107) and 10−6 second (Notations 124 to 127). Their range is Notations 104 to 127. Some of these same people say it will require an estimated temperature of 2×1012 Kelvin to create the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP). Others have it as high as 1015 K. Using these estimates, this process could begin as early as notations 136 and 137. Note the temperature has quickly turned from superconducting cold at ‑135°C or -211° F (138 K) just above notation 102 to about 3,456,179,999,540.33° F (1.9201×1012 K) at notation 136.

If 1015 K, it would be between the 145 and 146 notations. The universe is less than ten seconds old, the mass of the universe is 3.883×1035 kilograms and it is substantially charged at 3.3461×1026 Coulombs and it is all happening within an area defined by 1,791,660 miles. As a a point of comparison, the earth ranges from 91 to 93 million miles from the Sun. The moon is from 224,000 to 251,000 miles from the earth.

The big bang theorists postulate that it requires 175 MeV per particle (mega-electron-volt). Given all the data being generated within this model, there may be a way to figure it out. It is beyond us so we ask the experts, “How do we figure that out!?!” Note that within notations 136 and 137 the universe is less than one-hundredth of second from its start and at notation 145, it is 2.4 seconds.

The temperature scale within this model is an open question. The charge, length, mass and time were taken as given by Max Planck and render results that can be conceptually adjusted, even corrected, if there are logic errors.

For the big bang theory the Quark-Gluon Plasma (QGP) is the transition and transformational key and the first “stuff” of the universe. No earlier than Notation 104, and possibly as late as Notation 137, are the first manifestations of matter.

In the Quiet Expansion, the pure mathematics and geometries of Notations 1 to 66 become our first manifestations of matter within Notation 67. So, in our studies we will be looking for come kind of recalibration process by which the QGP becomes part of notation 67, perhaps 66, and all notations adjust.

Within the Quiet Expansion model, spheres-geometries-ratios are the very first manifestations within the small scale universe (Notations 1-67). If we are to incorporate the speculations of the bbt, there is a magical transition between 67 and the quark-gluon plasma’s emergence. What is it? How is it best described? What is the finite-infinite relation?

We’ll be searching around within this cosmic soup, looking ahead at the Quark, Hadron, Lepton and Photon Epochs. Between the Photon and Hydrogen comes the cosmic Dark Ages, reionization comes much later. Then, what about aneutronic fusion? …the four or five forces of nature?  …about the geometries of flavors, Up-Down, Top-Bottom, Strange-Charm? Might there be Brownian stochastic flavors?

Regarding the flavor problem, JoAnne Hewett, a theoretical physicist at the Stanford Linear Accelerator in Menlo Park, asks, “Why are there so many flavors? Why do we have six types of quarks and six types of leptons, and why do they have the different masses that they do? We don’t have a clue.”

Let’s figure it out.

First, we defer to the posting about numbers and to the four processes that are being defined in the Exponentiation, Expansion, and Inflation post. Intentionally, the words associated with the particle flavors are used to describe the four basic processes of multiplication and division. Also, let it be noted that there is something exquisitely important about spontaneous symmetry breaking.

Now, it appears that we have the pieces of the puzzle but perhaps not a proper orientation to them.

A look at the progression of ideation.

Perhaps to understand the electroweak theory and its epoch will require going all the way back to 1687 when Sir Isaac Newton first postulated his theory that space and time are absolute. One can imagine that he could feel how both were infinite and unalterable and how both envelope all things everywhere within a perfect homogeneity. Obviously when it came to physical objects, he had a deep sense of empathy. His key concept is that space and time are independent aspects of objective reality. This point of view became commonsense logic for most of the world’s population. But, is it so? None of us should ever be satisfied with just one point of view. A fellow by the name of Gottfried Leibniz, a contemporary of Newton (and also an inventor of calculus), gives a very different point of view. Increasingly throughout the world today, there are many scientists and mathematicians who for many different reasons concur with the conclusions of Leibniz. Their work will become part of the final analysis of this posting.

If space and time are not absolute, but quantized, discrete and/or derivative, we have the beginnings of a fundamentally different perception of space and time. To see how that plays out, fast forward to 1967 at MIT where another natural philosopher and scientist, Stephen Weinberg, postulated his theory that there is a fundamental relation between electromagnetism and the nuclear weak forces, both beta-decay and kaon-decay. So compelled by his vision, Weinberg, just 34 years old at the time, wrote a landmark paper, A Model of Leptons (PDF). Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (21): 1264–1266. It would be the first time in history that fundamental forces had been mathematically related and it would become one of the most-cited papers in all of high energy and particle physics.

A truly small-scale universe. Neither Newton nor Weinberg had any sense that there was a domain between the exquisitely small Planck base units and the fermion. In fairness to both, the Planck base units were not postulated until 1899 and it required the rich conceptual developments in mathematics and physics between 1687 and 1899 before Max Planck could begin to envision natural limits that define our universe. And, in a special deference to Weinberg, it wasn’t until 2001 that Frank Wilczek opened the door to begin to study Max Planck’s mysterious numbers. Most folks who knew a little about Planck’s base units considered them to be nothing more than Dirac-like numerology.

Then, it wasn’t until 2011 that the first base-2 path was cut through to the Planck Length. It would be December 2014 before another path was cut, this time to Planck Time. And then, in just a few months (February 2015), paths were cut for charge, mass and temperature. In April 2016 a horizontally-scrolled chart of the top-level numbers began to emerge so each could be more systemically analyzed. The charts are all known as the Big Board-little universe. As a cosmology, it is contrasted to the big bang; it gives order to the universe by using base-2 exponential notation from the Planck Time to the Age of the Universe; and, it is known as the Quiet Expansion.

The numbers are all a simple progression. Multiplication by 2 is nature’s ordering system. It is simple logic that creates an ordered relation for everything, everywhere, for all time throughout the universe. Our challenge is to tie the resulting numbers to actual realities. One of our first observations was that length and time seemed to track well together. In between the 143rd and 144th notation was one second and its time measurement was very close to the speed of light in a vacuum.

Obviously, the most simple observation is that the current time is always at the top of the chart. The beginning of creation is always at the bottom of the chart. It would seem anything prior to the current time is historical — it is the past. But, all of the notations above 67 appear to define things as we find them today.

Key questions could be asked: Why is time linear and asymmetric? Could it be be nonlinear and symmetric? Is it possible that nothing is past? If so, then might it be possible that everything and every notation is always present and what appears to be an historical record (the past) is actually an active imprint on the universe?

That is a possibility that appears to be worth some time to consider.


* Note: We welcome your questions and comments.

Exponentiation, Expansion, Inflation, and Acceleration

Tetra200Most recent updates: Throughout August 2016.
WORK-IN PROGRESS  (Not even a first draft)
The enclosed chart will definitely go from 112th notation (about 3.3″ inches in length) down to the 67th notation (2.38509018×10-15 meters), the place of particle physics.

Introduction. There are four processes within the progression of possible geometries within the our chart of the base-2 numbers from the Planck scale to the Age of the Universe. There are many more processes that we can imagine, however, these are the most simple. Once we have analyzed these four progressions of geometries, we will attempt to define how these geometries interact to create more complexity. With this posting, we open more questions than we answer. Many more calculations need to be done, listed, and analyzed. Two of earliest progressions have also been introduced within the large horizontally-scrolled chart on lines 8 and 9; one is called Base-2 Vertices and other, Scaling Vertices.

With this posting the concern is to define the whole/parts relations.

The first process/progression. Up arrow, also a caret (^), hat and/or tentOur initial sample starts with a 3.3-inch tetrahedron; we divide the edges in half and connect the new vertices.  The result is a new number of necessarily related tetrahedrons (4) and an octahedron. This combination is sometimes called an octet. Typically by using division, it is assumed at each step, things are getting smaller and smaller.  In the very first exercise in December 2011, that was the process. But, we were not concerned about the resulting numbers of objects,  we were just following one of the smaller objects until we were at about the size of the Planck Length. At notation 67 (on our way, going further inside, to notation 1), the question would eventually be asked, “What is getting smaller now? Do the number of objects continue to increase or in some special way does everything begin to share the same structures and do the numbers actually begin to decrease?”  We didn’t know then and we do not know today, however, thoughts about homogeneity and isotropy began crossing through our minds and continue to do so.

Here the total number of objects is being considered for the first time from a common size of about two inches increasingly smaller, down to to the 67th notation.  Perhaps when we get to that point, somebody will have some advice for us. Do the number of objects continue to increase or is there a consolidation or is it both?

The second process. The V, also symbol for Von Neumann universe, a class of hereditary well-founded sets. This collection is formalized by Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZFC).

The numbers are related to just the objects as they are. Multiplied by 2, the number of same-sized objects would be getting larger, all expanding in an identical fashion. Analogues with cellular division will be studied closely. This progression of numbers has been taken out to the 20th notation here: https://bblu.org/2016/01/08/number/#4  It was taken out to the 201 notation as a simple count of vertices here:  https://bbludata.wordpress.com/vertices

Now the counting would begin as close to the Planck scale as possible, possibly notation 2 with its eight scaling vertices or notation 3 with its 64 scaling vertices or perhaps even later. That logic is being examined.

It all needs to be understood in light of the first, third and fourth processes for all 201 notations.

The third process. The line, bottom-to-top and top-to-bottom.  Here is the most direct path between 1 and 201.  The numbers are related to the edges being multiplied by 2.  It could be either a single dimensional line, or a two-dimensional plate, and have shared edges with the three-dimensional processes as iterated  above and below.  Here we are describing the two-dimensional plates that tile and tessellate the universe.

The fourth process: Up/down, V and ^ from any point, any notation.  Possibly the first up/down process began at the 67th notation.

All four processes can in some manner be applied to each notation, to each group of 67 notations, and to all 200+ notations.

Calculations of the Numbers of Tetrahedrons & Octahedrons

This is a discovery process; we are learning as we go along this path. Your suggestions are most welcomed.

0 Tetrahedron(s) Octahedron(s)
1 a= 4
Note: There are 4 tetrahedrons (a) and one octahedron (b) within every tetrahedron.
2 16 + 8 = 24 c+d=#2a where (4)(a)=c and (8)(b)=d (4 + 6) = 10
Note: There are 6 octahedrons and 8 tetrahedrons within every octahedron. Each column provides the running total of each object going smaller. It is a notation-by-notation  count of identical objects.
In each step, there are always numbers from each column to be added together (within the parenthesis) to get a total.  The first number in each parentheses is tetrahedral-related and the ratio is always 4 tetrahedrons to one octahedron. The second number in each parentheses is octahedral-related and the ratio is always 8 tetrahedrons to 6 octahedrons.
3 (96+ 8o) = 176 (24+ 60) = 84
4 (704 + 672) = 1376 (176 + 504) = 680
5 (5504 + 5440) = 10944 (1376 + 4044) = 5420
6 (43776 + 43,360) = 87136 (10944 + 32,520) = 43,416
7 (347776 + 347328) = 695,104 (87136 + 260,496) = 347,632
8 (2780416 + 2781056) = 5,561,472 (695,104 + 2085792) = 2,780,896
What questions could we ask about the whole/parts relations? What might be imputed by watching the ratios between the two columns?
9 (22245888 + 22247168) = 44,493,056 (5,561,472 + 16,678,464) = 22,238,400
10 (177972224 + 177907200) = 355,879,424 (44,493,056 + 133430400) = 177,923,456
11 (711888896+ 1423387648) = 2,135,276,544 (355,879,424 + 1067540736) = 1,423,420,160
12 (8,541,106,176 + 11,387,361,280) = 19,928,467,456 (2,135,276,544 + 8,540,520,960) = 10,675,797,504
13 (79,713,869,824 + 85,406,380,032) = 165,120,249,856 (19,928,467,456 + 64,054,785,024) = 83,983,252,480
176/84=2.09523809524 1376/680=2.02352941176 10944/5420=2.01918819188 87136/43416=2.0070020269 695104/347632=1.99953974318 19,928,467,456/10,675,797,504=1.86669590244


Quiet Expansion of the Universe

Most recent update: August 2016
WORK-IN PROGRESS, EARLY DRAFT for the scientific-academic communities
There is a similar posting for the general public.
by Bruce Camber, New Orleans

Stephen Hawking rhetorically asks, “Where did the universe come from?” then he immediately answers this penultimate question about life: “The answer, as most people can tell you, is the big bang. Everything in existence, expanding exponentially in every direction, from an infinitely small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense point, creating a cosmos filled with energy and matter. But what does that really mean and where did it all begin?” Cf. the Ref. [1]

The big bang is still just a theory. And, of course, there are other possibilities. Notwithstanding, within this post, we focus on a very simple model that has only been explored by a small group of high school people (and others within our extended community). We ask, “Is it possible that the universe began with an infinitesimally small length, time, mass, and temperature and a relatively small charge? Yes, we use those numbers defined by Max Planck in 1899, the Planck base units, to begin.  It seems that we’ve been staring at these keys for a long time.

Might the mechanism for the expansion of a cell be a metaphor for the expansion of the universe? Could our universe be functionally based on the simplest mathematics, doubling each step of the way? Is our universe, in fact, highly ordered and totally relational?”

First principles. We postulate that the Planck scale is the unification of the four forces of nature with the unification of the five Planck base units with those constants that define each unit, and that this unification, all defined as working ratios, is uniquely differentiated within each doubling throughout the entire 200+ base-2 exponential notations from the first moment of creation to this moment, the current time and present day. It appears that all 200+ notations are dynamic, actively participating in the current definition of our universe. This postulation provides a working environment by which we hope to build a diversity of bridges from the Planck scale to all existing physical theories whereby each notation creates a very unique environment for predictive values.

We call this model the Quiet Expansion of the Universe, hereinafter, abbreviated QE.

We begin this study with the Planck Epoch, then attempt to justify reinterpreting the Grand Unification and Inflationary Epochs. The Electroweak Epoch begins the crossover which continues through the Quark Epoch and into the Hadron, Lepton and Electron Epochs. Thereafter, the QE will have so many bridges up from the Planck Epoch, it should become an expressway to the remaining epochs and definitions given within the big bang theory, hereinafter, abbreviated bbt.

The Planck base units are further defined by the speed of light (or special relativity), the gravitational constant (or general relativity), the reduced Planck constant (or ħ or quantum mechanics), the Coulomb constant (or ε0 or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or kB or of temperature). All are bound within this Planck scale; and, herein it is proposed to be the foundations for a highly-ordered, totally-relational universe. The key to our model is multiplication by 2, starting with the Planck base units. A nexus of transformation between the finite and the infinite is defined by the crossing lines at “0” within the images on the right.

Universe View
Each epoch of the Big Bang has a corresponding set of notations.
We question the first four epochs: The Planck Epoch, the Grand
Unification Epoch, and the Inflationary and Electroweak Epochs.
What is time? What is space?
What is finite? What is infinite?
Who was more correct, Newton or Leibniz?
The four key parts of the big bang theory that are being questioned represent an infinitesimal amount of time within the QE model, surely
not enough for the proposed events of those epochs.

Wilczek Wiki
In 2001 Frank Wilczek wrote a series of articles for Physics Today
(link embedded here) about the Planck base units. Up until
that point, this part of Planck’s work had been virtually ignored
by the academic-and-scientific community (for over 100 years).

We have many, many questions. We have hopes and dreams. If the QE numbers can withstand the scrutiny of the academic and scientific communities, and we can begin to grasp the finite nature of space and time, and we can open a larger discussion about the nature of the finite-infinite relation, just maybe the bbt will recede and take a new role as an important chapter in academic as well as human history.

This posting is a “very-very rough draft.” It not yet a first draft. Given the depth and breadth of the foundations upon which the big bang theory (bbt) currently rest, your comments while this posting is being refined, are most welcomed. If this embedded link does not open your email browser, my address is camber (at) bblu (dot) org (or click on Contact).

Those pivotal Planck calculations were done in 1899 by Max Planck. In December 2011 we were just beginning to learn about Planck and his calculations. We sought out experts and quickly found the work of Prof. Dr. Frank Wilczek (at that time  at MIT). With very few exceptions, it was not until Wilczek began writing a series of articles in 2001, Scaling Mt. Planck, (Physics Today), did anybody think those Planck numbers amounted to anything more than numerology. It would take another ten years before we would come along, naively doing our thing with our geometries and base-2 exponential notation.

Though most academics are familiar with Kees Boeke’s 1957 work (Cosmic View) using base-10, we were not. Most all our academic contacts made quick reference to it, yet they were still surprised to see our base-2 chart from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe. Some asked, “Why haven’t we’ve seen this before now?”  The others just thought it was more numerology akin to Dirac (link goes to a YouTube audio where Dirac explains in his own words).

We are confident that the proponents of the big bang have never considered the first 67 notations defined within this quiet expansion model.

This simple work of multiplying the Planck units by 2, and then each result by 2, over and over and over again is a bit tedious. If you were to do it, in just over 200 steps you would emerge at the Age of the Universe and the Observable Universe. You can follow the progression in any one of several charts. Base-2 exponential notation is what cells use. Other processes like chemical bonding and bifurcation theory have analogous dynamics.

These 200+ doublings have at various points been called: (1) archetypes, (2) clusters, (3) containers, (4) domains, (5) groups, (6) layers, (7) notations, (8) ratios, (9) sets or (10) steps. We believe that each captures a face of the functionality within the notation. We recognize that these Planck base units can be computed in many different ways. Eventually, in order to refine results, the reduced Planck constant may be used. The various values of gravity (G) can be tested. Important at this time is consistency and equivalence of methodologies across all calculations within all 200+ notations. Our initial goal is to create a simple working model that outlines the general working parameters and boundary conditions to give us a platform. Now we begin looking at the key critical ratios throughout the model with a hope that we may discern natural groups and patterns that might help us to judge the veracity of the model itself.

Within our web presence, Big Board-little universe, there is more background from our rather brief history.

Big-bang Theory Drowns Out Discussions

To learn as much as possible as quickly as possible, we’ve used Wikipedia’s summaries. Wikipedia’s goal is to represent the best current thinking of the thought leaders within the relevant scientific communities. The scientists who are most often quoted have lived within this theory throughout their professional careers. It is part of their intellectual being. Notwithstanding, we believe most all of their work can be absorbed within the QE. Questions are primarily raised about the Planck Epoch, the Grand Unification Epoch, the Inflationary Epoch and the Electroweak Epochs. Taken together, these three “epochs” represent less than a fraction of a fraction of a second within the QE model. And, with just a few tweaks, we believe some of this work and all the work within the subsequent epochs can be readily integrated.

The writers within the Wikipedia community overlap with those within these scientific communities. Wikipedia, constantly in the process of refining their writing, provides several summaries of the History of the Universe. All work based on observations and measurements has a place within the QE model. Our guess is that the interpretation of those observations and measurements will become richer and more informative when the QE parameters and boundary conditions are engaged.

In 1970 there were truly competing theories about the beginning of the universe. By 1990 the bbt had become dominant. In 2011 our little group of high school geometry people began to explore the interior structures of the tetrahedron and octahedron. Then we found within our tilings and tessellations, and then all those base-2 exponential notations from the Planck base units to the Age of the Universe and to the Observable Universe. That continuum appeared so simple, we first engaged it as an excellent STEM (Science-Technology-Engineering-Mathematics) tool. Yet, with further study and thought, it also seemed to challenge some of our basic commonsense assumptions about nature (the back story). As we studied our new little model, the bbt continued to solidify its dominance within the general culture at the same time we started to question it. We began to believe that the actual physics of the first moments of creation might be better defined by the simple mathematics of a quiet expansion, especially those first 67 notations. These 67 have never been recognized as such and certainly have not been discussed within academia. The great minds throughout the ages have been unaware of the 200+ base-2 notations, especially those first 67 notations. So mysterious are the 67, we began more actively to think about them and to make some postulations about their place and purpose.

Our first posting about this Quiet Expansion was a result of our naive, informal, and often idiosyncratic studies of the Planck base units, base-2 exponential notation, and an inherent geometry assumed (hypothesized, hypostatized, and/or imputed) to be within every scale (doubling, layer, notation, step, etc) throughout the universe. We have moved slowly. Having backed into the Planck base units from our simple exercises in geometry class, we were not at all sure of ourselves. So, after observing our results for a couple of years, we began asking the question, “Could this be a more-simple, more-inclusive model of the universe than the big bang theory?” Because we only have the beginnings of an outline of a model, we continued our quest and continued to ask more questions:

Who? What? Why? When? Where? How?

Who: The history of the Big Bang Theory (bbt) is highly documented. It is an intellectual cornerstone within experimental and theoretical physics, cosmology, and astrophysics.
What: To challenge the bbt appears foolhardy at best. Yet, there are many, many reasons to challenge it, but most of all because (1) it is overly complex and confusing, (2) it is not very good philosophy, and (3) it is very poor psychology.
Why: The first three key parts of the bbt, involving substantially less than a trillionth of a second, are based on hunches and a need to shoehorn data to support the model.

Wikipedia says, “Planck scale is beyond current physical theories; it has no predictive value. The Planck epoch is assumed (or theorized) to have been dominated by quantum effects of gravity.”

We say that the Planck scale is the starting point for the initial six notations (de facto defined by the bbt) and that these notations are shared by everything, everywhere in the universe. Painfully aware of the limitations of our vocabulary, these first notations are considered to be archetypal forms, structure and substance. Archetypal is used in the sense of the original pattern or model by which all things of the same type are representations, the prototype, or a perfect example. For more, see all of 67 encapsulating notations (opens in a new window or tab).

Both models have made key assumptions. We believe the QE model is internally more consistent, imaginative, and stimulating.

The key to the QE: More than just the bbt‘s four forces of nature within the Planck scale, we assume these four are encapsulated within all five Planck base units and the constants that define them, and that this unification is carried through all 201+ notations. And, as we have noted, the Planck base units are defined by length, time, mass, temperature and charge; and, these are further defined by the speed of light (or special relativity), the gravitational constant (or general relativity), the reduced Planck constant (or ħ or quantum mechanics), the Coulomb constant (or ε0 or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or kB or of temperature).

The Planck scale is not beyond logic, numbers, and conceptual integrity. Homogeneity, isotropy and simple logic rule. Yet, within the Quiet Expansion (QE) model, we have applied that simple logic somewhat arbitrarily by placing the Planck Temperature at the top of the scale, just beyond the 201st notation. It then goes down approaching Absolute Zero. We are ready to adjust it at any time when a more integrative logic prevails! Also, we are increasingly finding a simple relational logic between all the Planck base units. Of course, this logic will be revisited with every future analysis of the QE model.

Within the QE model, the Planck Charge, a Coulombs value, is taken as it is given. Within the bbt, the Planck Charge is ignored and the bbt value is postulated to be as large as possible. Their measurement is given in GeV units, one billion electron volts. Add 1016 zeroes to it and you have a charge unlike any other! It is a very grand assumption that truly requires a huge leap of faith!

To begin to understand all these numbers and their correlations, questions are asked, “Are these all non-repeating, never-ending numbers like Pi? Are all numbers that are non-repeating and never-ending somehow part of the infinite yet also the beginning of quantum mechanics?” The suggestion has been made that we carry out each of the Planck numbers at least 10 decimal places, and if need be, 100 decimal places, and possibly even 1000 decimal places, to see if patterns can be discerned.

The QE model holds that things are simple before complex and everything is related to everything. Imputed, hypostatized and/or hypothesized are pointfree vertices and simple geometries as the deep infrastructure that gives rise to the work on combinatorics, cellular automaton, cubic close packing, bifurcation theory (and the Feigenbaum’s constants), Langlands program, mereotopology (point-free geometry), the 80-known binary operations, and scalar field theory. Here are people working on theories and constructions of the simple, yet their concepts are anything but simple.
When: In the very beginning…
Wikipedia says that the Planck epoch requires speculative proposals, a “New Physics” such as “…the Hartle–Hawking initial state, string landscape, string gas cosmology, and the ekpyrotic universe.” Each is a conceptually-rich, dense jungle of ideas. Cutting through that entanglement is only for the highly-motivated and academically astute. Most of us will just go on to the grand
unification epoch
, in search of a logical system that builds consistently upon itself.

About the bbt model, Wikipedia simply says, “The three forces of the Standard Model are unified.” Of course, the QE goes much further, however, first consider a bbt problem. Electromagnetism, gravitation, weak nuclear interaction, and strong nuclear interaction are most often related to relations defined above the 65th notation.

Wikipedia says, “Cosmic inflation expands space by a factor of the order of 1026 over a time of the order of 10−33 to 10−32 seconds.[1] The universe is supercooled from about 1027 down to 1022 kelvins.[6] The Strong Nuclear Force becomes distinct from the Electroweak Force.” [1] (Our emphasis) First, consider that the Planck Temperature is 1.41683×1032 Kelvin. The bbt appears to skip the cooling from 1032 to 1027 Kelvin and it uses  bubbly magic  to address what causes the cooling to 1022 Kelvin. Also, consider the amount of expansion and the short duration assumed in their statement above. To create that much space in that short of an interval would require light to travel so far beyond its normal speed, it would constitute the penultimate anomaly.

Also, because the bbt begins at the Planck Temperature, they truly need a supercooled concept. Within the Quiet Expansion model the temperatures from notations 1 through 102 are all superconducting, being well below the superconducting transition temperatures. Perhaps the very concept of temperature will become better understood as a result of our struggles to define a different model of the universe.

About this inflationary epoch, Wikipedia says, “The forces of the Standard Model have separated, but energies are too high for quarks to coalesce into hadrons, instead forming a quark-gluon plasma. These are the highest energies directly observable in experiment in the Large Hadron Collider.”

Within the QE, the quark-gluon plasma which requires 1012 Kelvin, is between notation 135 and 136,  9.6008×1011 Kelvin  to 1.92016×1012 Kelvin respectively. Notation 136 is 4.6965×10-3 seconds from the  space-time singularity. One second is between Notations 143 and 144. Also, the Kelvin scale is counter-intuitive in many ways. The temperature of the Sun is about 5,778 K. Within the QE, that is expressed between Notations 107 (3.5765×103 K ) and 108 (7153.178 K). The human temperature at 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit is 310.15 Kelvin which is between Notations 103 and 104 (447.073 K). Also, at Notation 103  the Planck Length is now .163902142 millimeters or 1.63902142×10-4 meters or about the size of a human egg.

The exacting nature of the correlations between the multiples of the Planck base units is just being explored for the first time. But, to say the least, within the QE everything everywhere is related through simple mathematics.

In Wikipedia, their category experts say, “The physics of the electroweak epoch is less speculative and much better understood than the physics of previous periods of the early universe. The existence of W and Z bosons has been demonstrated, and other predictions of electroweak theory have been experimentally verified.”

Finally the the bbt gives us something that isn’t incomplete or highly speculative. Yet, even with such assurance, the logic of the bbt is difficult to follow. Again, within the QE model the only duration that would allow for W and Z bosons is somewhere around notation 65. There is just not enough “conceptual” space and time for elementary particles and their effects.

Within this simple, highly-integrated progression,  the first measurement with a visceral meaning  is at Notation 32; the mass of the universe is 93.48 kilograms or about 206 pounds. By Notation 40 it is up to 2.39×104 kilograms (52 758.8 lbs or 27 tons. The universe is bulking up quickly and it is creating space and time as it goes.  Though we have some ideas about this mass, it should become more clear as we begin experimenting with the calculations of the Planck base units. We may also extend all the decimals out to at least ten places and begin to calculate more carefully each ratio within each notation and begin to do in-depth ratio analysis of these progressions.

Consider this unusual concept. Within every notation, the QE model aggregates base-8 pointfree vertices using scaling laws and dimensional analysis (recommended by Prof. Dr. Freeman Dyson). There are single line entries for both the base-2 and base-8 progressions within the horizontally-scrolled chart.

There are 10,633,823,966,279,326,983,230,456,482,242,756,608 pointfree vertices at the 41st notation. The base-2 simple doublings could be aggregating structure as groups or sets. Defined by the Planck base units, in the range 41-to-60, we hypothesize that these are the domains for archetypal relations and systems. There are 549,755,813,888 base-2 pointfree vertices at Notation 41 and 5,070,602,400,912,917,605,986,812,821,504 at Notation 104.

There are enormous possibilities for mathematical constructions where ratios manifest as the real reality of the universe. The entitive nature of things (above the 67th notations) is derivative; the ratio is the primarily real. In our world of subject-object thinking, the hyphen represents that ratio.

Big Bang Theory (bbt)

Planck epoch

Planck time:
<10−43 seconds
Planck Temperature:
1032 Kelvin
First key bbt error
Planck Energy:
1019 GeV
Second key bbt error

unification epoch

<10−36 seconds
1016 GeV

Inflationary epoch
Electroweak epoch

<10−33 s to <10−32 seconds
(QE syncs to bbt time.)
1028 K to 1022 Kelvin
Expansion: 1026 meters
Editor: “science fiction”
Third key bbt error

Quark epoch

Fourth error: >10−31 to
>10−12 seconds
1012 Kelvin
Notice there is a bbt/QE convergence

Hadron epoch

10−6 seconds to
10−1 seconds
1010 Kelvin to
109 Kelvin

Lepton epoch

1 second to
10 seconds
109 K
Note: QE temp higher

Photon epoch-Nucleosynthesis

10 seconds to
103 seconds to
1013 seconds
<380 ka
1011 Kelvin to
109 Kelvin to
103 Kelvin
10 MeV to
100 keV


Matter-dominated era

47 ka (47,000 years) to
10 Ga (10×109) years
104 Kelvin to
4 Kelvin


380 ka (380,000 years)
4000 Kelvin

Dark Ages

380 ka to
150 Ma (Mega-annus) or
150 million years
4000 Kelvin to
60 Kelvin

Stelliferous Era

150 Ma
(150 million years)
100 Ga
(150 billion years)
60 Kelvin to
0.03 Kelvin


~150 Ma to
1 Ga
>60 K to
19 K

Galaxy formation and evolution

1 Ga to 10 Ga
19 Kelvin to 4 Kelvin

Dark-energy-dominated era

>10 Ga
<4 K

Present time

13.8 Ga
2.7 Kelvin

Quiet Expansion (QE)

Notations 0-1
0 = Planck base units
Planck time:
5.39106×10−44 seconds
Notation 1: 1.0782−43 (s)
Notation 2: 2.156×10−43 (s)
Notation 0: 1.416×1032 Kelvin
Notation 1: 4.4×10-27 (K)
Notation 2: 8.8169×10-27 (K)
Notation 0: 1.8×10-18 Coulombs
Notation 1: 3.7511×10-18 (C)
Notation 2: 7.0523×10-18 (C)

Notations 7 to 31

Notation 2: 2.156×10−43 seconds
Notation 31: 1.157×10−34 (s)
7.0523×10-18 (C)
Notation 31: 4.02×10-9 (C)

Notations 32 to 40

Notation 32: 2.31×10−34 seconds
Notation 40: 5.927×10−32 (s)
Notation 32: 1.89×10-19 Kelvin
Notation 40: 2.42×10-17 (K)
Notation 32: 6.94×10-26 meters
Notation 40: 1.77×10-23 (m)
Notation 32: 8.05×10-9 Coulombs
Notation 40: 2.06×10-6 (C)

Notations 41 to 104

Notation 41: 1.18×10−31 seconds
Notation 104: 1.09×10−12 (s)
Notation 41: 4.84×10-17 Kelvin
Notation 104: 4.47×102 (K)
(310K = 98.33°F, 36.85° C)

Notation 105 to 142

Notation 105: 2.18×10−12 (s)
Notation 142: 3.0×10−1 (s)
Notation 105: 8.94×102 Kelvin
Notation 142: 6.14×1013 (K)

Notations 143 to 147

Notation 143: 6.01×10−1 (s)
Notation 147: 9.61 (s)
Notation 143: 2.45×1014 Kelvin
Notation 147: 3.93×1015 (K)

Notations 147 to 154 to
Notation 187

Notation 147: 9.6185 seconds
Notation 154: 1231.1 (s)
Notation 187: 1.05×1013 (s)
or 10,575,741,215,500 (s)
or 320± thousand years
Notation 147: 3.932×1015 Kelvin
Notation 154: 5.03×1017 (K)
Notation 187: 4.32×1027 (K)
Notation 147: 3.346×1026 (C)
Notation 154: 4.28×1028 (C)
Notation 187: 3.67×1038 (C)

Notations 184 to 201

Notation 184: 1,321,967,651,940 seconds or 41,919.31 years
Notation 201: 10 billion years
Notation 184: 5.4×1026 Kelvin
Notation 201: 7.0×1031 (K)

Notations 187

10,575,741,215,500 (s)
320± thousand years
Notation 187: 3.6×1038 (C)

Notations 187 to 196

Notations 187: 320,000+ years
Notation 196:
171.2± million years
5,414,779,502,320,000 seconds
Notations 187: 4.3×1027 Kelvin
Notations 196: 2.2×1030 (K)

Notations 187 to 204+

Notation 196:
171.2± million years
Notation 204+:
Distant future
Notations 196: 2.2×1030 (K)
Notation 204: 1.416×1032 (K)

Notations 187 to 189

Notation 187: 1.05×1013 seconds
or 320± thousand years to
Notation 189: 1.3± million years
Notation 187: 4.32×1027 Kelvin
Notation 189: 1.72×1028 (K)

Notations 187 to
Notation 201+

Notation 189: 1.3± million years
Notation 201: 10 billion years

Notations 187 to
Notation 201+

Notation 201: 10 billion years
Notation 201: 7.08×1031 Kelvin

Notation 201+

Notation 201: 13.8 billion years
Notation 201: 7.08×1031 Kelvin
   — most active edit area—

Here is the deep infrastructure of the universe where the simple mathematics of ratios between space, time, charge, mass and temperature create real realities within every notation. We postulate that these ratios are the “really real.” Within the continuum of charge here is the so-called dark energy within notations 185 to 200 and with the continuum of mass there is the dark matter. If this model is ever validated, perhaps it’ll be seen that both are deep energy and deep matter of the universe, the manifestations of really real mathematical ratios.

The bbt’s Quark Epoch generalizes 63 of the QE notations, from 41 to 104. These notations within the QE model are foundational so perhaps this comparison to Quark Epoch is a key. Consider the estimated requirement for temperature. The bbt epochs can not begin until the temperature is cool enough. Given that temperature requirement, within the QE model, the Quark Epoch would not begin until up-and-around Notation 136 where the temperature has finally risen to 1.9201×1012 Kelvin. If that is the right range, as suggested by proponents of the bbt, less than a second has transpired, the universe has a diameter of about 874 square miles and a mass of about 1.896×1032 kilograms.

Within the QE model from around Notations 65 to 69 is the transition from the small scale to the human scale. This “human scale” is the middle third of the 201 notations, i.e. 67-to-134. Even though two-thirds of the way through the 201 doublings, less than a second has transpired from the start.

In the Quark Epoch the bbt and QE begin to cross paths and overlap. Wikipedia says, “Quarks are bound into hadrons. Over the hadron epoch, the process of baryogenesis results in an elimination of anti-hadrons (baryon asymmetry).” As noted within Wikipedia, some of these perceptions come directly out of the laboratory, such as CERN in Geneva, where this phenomenon has been observed. So, other than the improbable placement within the time/temperature curve, all processes herein after become readily integrated within the QE model.

Let us take stock of where we are.  Even though the Quark Epoch of the bbt seems to  overlap and begin to become simpatico within the QE, there are fundamental logic and conceptual problems ahead.

Let us take stock of where we are.  Even though the Quark Epoch of the bbt seems to  overlap and begin to become simpatico within the QE, there are fundamental logic and conceptual problems ahead.

A key question within the QE model is, “What is a notation?”  All 200+ are also known as an archetype, cluster, doubling, group, layer, set, and/or step. Each word is perspectival.  Each notation is dynamic, always in the process of being defined, right up to the current time within our current notation.

Space and time are local per notation and all “past” is an imprint on the universe that literally defines it beingness right now, thus no time asymmetry.

What does that mean?  Each notation has an active role right now in defining who we are and what this universe is here and now. Each notation has an active role in defining all other notations.

Today, right now, all of these notations are actively defining the now.  We are imprinting on the universe right now.  The past is not past; it is an imprint on the universe.  There is only the Now, only right now, only today.

Each notation has an active role in defining who we are and what this universe is; and, each notation has an active role in defining all other notations. Today, right now, all of these notations actively define humanity or the human scale (67-to-134), must therefore be something like the archetypes of forms and functions (notations 1-to-67) that define our deeper beingness. The notations from 134-to-200 define our planetary and galactic systems and this is where most of the work of those physicists, cosmologists, and astrophysicists have worked.

In just a few more notations, between 142 and 143, the universe is at the one second mark. This measurement is most often used to determine the speed of light. Yet, as noted in earlier postings, within every notation, the Planck length divided by the multiple of the Planck Time renders an approximation of the speed of light. It is just commonsense when we see that the speed of light plays prominently in the definitions of Planck Length and Planck Time.

The question to be answered, “What is the meaning of temperature? …within the bbt? Within the QE model, we impute that it is the total temperature throughout the area defined by the notation (or cluster, container, domain, doubling, group, layer, or step). This measurement within the Hadron Epoch within the bbt is lower than it is within the QE. There is a natural correlation between all these numbers within the QE simply because they start with the same definitional characteristics (the Planck base units) and the evolution of those numbers using base-2 exponential notation. The ratio of length to temperature renders 7.3322+ ratio. [Editor’s note: Please double-check this figure. Then check it again.] That result is currently being analyzed, space-to-temperature or kelvin per meters.

In 1972 George Ellis and Stephen Hawking began to explore the boundary conditions that define our universe between 10-13 centimeters (elementary particles) and 1028 cm, the assumed radius of the universe. They did not approach the Planck base units which would have expanded their range to 1.616199×10−35 meters (Planck Length) and then it would have tucked them in at about 5.1942×1025 meters according to current best guesses regarding the Age of the Universe.

Earlier it was observed that the big bang is not good philosophy and it is bad psychology. Philosophy is taken as a study of first principles and systems, the universals and constants that create the boundary conditions as well as the continuity equations that bind our universe together. Since 1972, especially with the very key question about the very nature of the first microseconds, the bbt has not progressed very far. Their Planck epoch is still mysterious. It is bad psychology for that very reason. It is so disjointed, so out of touch with anything human, it de facto promotes a certain form of nihilism.

Theories should have elegance, beauty, coherence, and simplicity. Children should be able to begin to understand. And with the QE, children quickly begin to understand 2 times 2. We just have to carry it out a few more places for them.

Conclusions: What does it all mean?
What are the implications if the Quiet Expansion is true?

For us all:
1. The finite-infinite relation is the key and requires more study.
2. The universe is finite, quantized, and derivative. Space and time are also finite, quantized, and derivative.
3. The infinite is continuity, symmetry and harmony giving rise to order, relations and harmony.
4. There are, therefore, natural laws, ethics, and values.

For the big bang theory:
1. All the actual measurements and observational work that have gone into the big bang theory (bbt) are supported by the quiet expansion.
2. All the major theoretical constructs of the bbt including and after the Quark Epoch are supported by the quiet expansion. There are adjustments of the time scale in which things occur, yet these are minor.
3. The definitions of the Grand unification epoch, Inflationary epoch, and Electroweak epoch will be upgraded substantially.

For the Quiet Expansion (QE):
1. The continued expansion of the universe is fully supported within the quiet expansion.
2. There are just over 200 notations that define the universe.
3. These notations are all active, functional, and necessarily build on each other.
4. These notations will also be defined as:
•   archetypes
•   clusters
•   containers
•   domains
•   doublings
•   groups
•   layers
•   ratios
•   sets
•   steps

5. As an archetype, each notation serves specific purposes in defining the textures and substance of the universe determined by the ranges within the Planck base units.

The future, both short-term and long-term: Our “To Do” List.
1. Run the ratios: There is a meaningful ratio between each of the five Planck base units within each of the notations. Volunteers? Want to help?
2. Double-check the numbers. Just yesterday there was a question about the Coulombs doublings. The simple mathematics of every doubling has to be correct.
3. Study the Mass” progression from 0 to 201 and intuit the meaning of mass given by just the pointfree vertices throughout the twenty notations from 50 to 70. Formulate key critical questions? What are the ratios saying?


Disclaimer: Our charts and discussion are our first time to make a comparative analysis between the big bang theory and our Quiet Expansion. Silly errors are inevitable. We are neophytes, not scholars, within these fields, so please point out any of our failures with logic, math, and physics. We will be most grateful.

This ends the first story about two very different models of the universe. Of course, it is a story that is to be continued.
Universe History of the Universe

Footnotes and endnotes:

The first working title of this posting was “Can A Quiet Expansion Challenge the Big Bang?” which was deemed too confrontational. The more important question was, “How did it all begin and what does it mean?” That change was made on Friday morning, June 17, 2016.

Cf. 1 Big bang theory: The world-renown Cambridge University physicist, Stephen Hawking, is the leading spokesperson for the big bang. He has become a rock star among scientists because he has been so successful as its primary advocate. Within his May 2016 PBS-TV series, Genius, he asks, “Where did the universe come from? The answer, as most people can tell you, is the big bang. Everything in existence, expanding exponentially in every direction,from an infinitely small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense point, creating a cosmos filled with energy and matter. But what does that really mean and where did it all begin?” His confidence also exudes from his 1988, best-selling book, A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes, and even from his foundational writing in 1973 (co-authored with Cambridge colleague, George F. R. Ellis) the highly-technical book, The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time.

Are space-and-time unbounded or bounded? If bounded, is our universe a container universe? Are the Planck base units and all the dimensionless constants part of the definitions of the boundaries between the finite and the infinite?

Within the current bbt analysis gravitational waves arise from within their inflationary period. The bbt thought leaders ascribe a much faster-than-light expansion just after the big bang. And, that begs the question: What are the preconditions of superluminal events and motion? There haven’t been any answers since 1902 when Jacobus Kapteyn made his initial observations, since the 1983 “superluminal workshop” at Jodrell Bank Observatory, and since the subsequent studies of microquasars, their accretion disks and such phenomenon as magnetorotational instability. It is all a very special language, logic and reality; the observational results are well-defined; yet, the most-penetrating conclusions are pending.

Stephen Hawking as seen in the opening of the PBS-TV series, Genius with Stephen Hawking, first aired in May 2016.


Notations 199 to 204 of 200+
Our little universe is still expanding.
199 200 201 <-Steps->
202 203 204
4.331×1016.s.* 8.663×1016.s.* 1.732×1017.s.* T(seconds) 3.4654×1017.s.* Age of the Universe
1.298×1024.km 2.597×1024.km 5.194×1024.km L(meters) 1.038×1025.km 2.077×1025.km 4.155×1025.km
1.748×1049kg 3.497×1049kg 6.995×1050kg M(kilograms) 1.399×1050kg 2.798×1050kg 5.596×1050kg
1.506×1042C 3.013×1042C 6.027×1042C C(Coulombs) 1.205×1043C 2.411×1043C 4.822×10431C
1.77×1031 K 3.542×1031 K 7.084×1031 K T(Kelvin) 1.416×1030 K PLANCK TEMPERATURE
2.008×1059 4.017×1059 8.034×1059 B2Vertices 1.606×1060 3.213×1060 6.427×1060
3.319×10181 2.655×10182 2.124×10183 ScalingV 1.699×10184 1.087×10185 8.702×10185
1 Notation 199: 43,318,236,018,400,000 seconds (2.7 billion years)
2 Notation 200: 86,636,472,036,800,000 seconds (5.4 billion years)
3 Notation 201: 173,272,944,073,600,000 seconds (10.8 billions years)
4 Notation 202: 346,545,888,147,200,000 seconds (21.6 billion years)Discussion: The Fullness of Time. The first billion years of the universe becomes two billion years within the next notation, four at the next, and eight at the next. If time is imputed to be discrete and quantized, the aggregate of all notations must be added to determine the actual first eon. There are 31,556,926,000,000,000 seconds in an EON. That would seem to be between notations 198 and 199. But, if time is discrete, it would be the sum of every prior notation so it would come within the notations 197 to 198.

That same logic would apply to the Age of the Universe in seconds. Notation 201 is 173,272,944,073,600,000 seconds or 10.8 billion years. The sum total of all notations from the Planck Time to the 201 notation is one Planck Time unit less than 173,272,944,073,600,000 seconds. We should round up! So, the universe today is within the earliest part of notation 201 using 13.8± billion years for the Age of the Universe.

Discussion: How many seconds old is the universe? Somewhere around 435.48 quintillion seconds. Each day adds another 86,400 seconds. Each year adds approximately 31.55 million seconds.

Basic math: There are 31.5 quintillion seconds in a billion years multiplied by 13.8 gives us our 435.48 quintillion years.

Notation, Exponentiation, Vertex Counts for B2 and Scaling Vertices: From notations 169 to 200+ the actual number of vertices is stored in its own page which can be accessed by clicking here.


Notations 193 to 198 of 200+
The billion year container is between notation 199 and 200.
193 194 195 <-Steps->
196 197 198
338,423,718,896,000.s 676,847,437,792,000.s 1,353,694,875,580,000.s T(seconds) 2,707,389,751,160,000.s 5,414,779,502,320,000.s 10,829,559,004,600,000.s
2.029×1023.km 4.058×1023.km 8.116×1023.km L(meters) 1.623×1024.km 3.246×1022.km 6.492×1023.km
2.732×1049kg 5.464×1049kg 1.092×1050kg M(kilograms) 2.185×1050kg 4.371×1050kg 8.743×1050kg
2.354×1040C 4.709×1040C 9.418×1040C C(Coulombs) 1.883×1041C 3.767×1041C 7.534×1041C
2.767×1029 K 5.534×1029 K 1.106×1030 K T(Kelvin) 2.213×1030 K 4.427×1030 K 8.885×1030 K
3.138×1057 6.277×1057 1.255×1058 B2Vertices 2.5108×1058 5.021×1058 1.004×1059
1.266×10176 1.013×10177 8.104×10177 ScalingV 6.483×10178 5.188×10179 4.149×10180
Discussion: The Fullness of Time: On the approach to the first billion years of the universe, it is within these six notations that the universe as we experience it begins. There are 31,556,926,000,000,000 seconds in an eon that is a billion years, between notations 199 and 200.

Key questions about order, relations and dynamics:

Notation, Exponentiation, Vertex Counts for B2 and Scaling Vertices: From notations 169 to 200+ the actual number of vertices will be stored in its own page which can be accessed by clicking here.


Notations 187 to 192 of 200+
toward 1,000,000 Years (Notations 188 and 189) and next will come an Eon (one billion years).
187 188 189 <-Steps->
190 191 192
10,575,741,215,500.s 21,151,482,431,000.s 42,302,964,862,000.s T(seconds) 84,605,929,724,000.s 169,211,859,448,000.s 338,423,718,896,000.s
3.170×1021.km 6.340×1021.km 1.268×1022.km L(meters) 2.536×1022.km 5.072×1022.km 1.014×1023.km
4.269×1047kg 8.538×1047kg 1.707×1048kg M(kilograms) 3.415×1048kg 6.831×1048kg 1.366×1049kg
3.679×1038C 7.358×1038C 1.471×1039C C(Coulombs) 2.943×1039C 5.886×1039C 1.177×1040C
4.323×1027 K 8.647×1027 K 1.729×1028 K T(Kelvin) 3.459×1028 K 6.918×1028 K 1.383×1029 K
4.9039×1055 9.8074×1055 1.9615×1056 B2Vertices 3.923×1056 7.846×1056 1.569×1057
4.8306×10170 3.864×10171 3.091×10172 ScalingV 2.473×10173 1.978×10174 1.582×10175
Discussion: The First Million Years: There are 31,556,952 seconds in a year, 31,556,952,000 seconds in a millennium and 31,556,926,000,000 seconds in a million years (Notations 188-189).

Key questions about order, relations and dynamics:

Notation, Exponentiation, Vertex Counts for B2 and Scaling Vertices: From notations 169 to 200+ the actual number of vertices will be stored in its own page which can be accessed by clicking here.


Notations 181 to 186 of 200+
Expanding toward 1,000,000 Years, then an Eon (one billion years).
181 182 183 <-Steps->
184 185 186
165,245,956,493.s 330,491,912,986.s 660,983,825,972.s T(seconds) 1,321,967,651,940.s 2,643,935,303,880.s 5,287,870,607,760.s
4.953×1019.km 9.907×1019.km 1.98×1020.km L(meters) 3.96×1020.km 7.925×1020.km 1.585×1021.km
6.67×1045kg 1.334×1046kg 2.668×1046kg M(kilograms) 5.336×1046kg 1.067×1047kg 2.134×1047kg
5.748×1036C 1.149×1037C 2.299×1037C C(Coulombs) 4.598×1037C 9.197×1037C 1.839×1038C
6.755×1025 K 1.351×1026 K 2.702×1026 K T(Kelvin) 5.404×1026 K 1.080×1027 K 2.161×1027 K
7.6624×1053 1.5324×1054 3.0649×1054 B2Vertices 6.1299×1054 1.2259×1055 2.4519×1055
1.842×10164 1.4742×10165 1.1793×10166 ScalingV 9.4349×10166 7.547×10167 6.0383×10168
Discussion: The First Million Years: There are 31,556,952 seconds in a year, 31,556,952,000 seconds in a millennium and 31,556,926,000,000 seconds in a million years (Notations 187-188).

Key questions about order, relations and dynamics:

Notation, Exponentiation, Vertex Counts for B2 and Scaling Vertices: From notations 169 to 200+ the actual number of vertices will be stored in its own page which can be accessed by clicking here.


Notations 163 to 168 of 200+
163 164 165 <-Steps->
166 167 168
630,363.29.s 1,260,726.59.s 2,521,453.19.s T(seconds) 5,042,906.38.s 10,085,812.77.s 20,171,625.54.s
1.88966306×1014.km 3.779×1014.km 7.558×1014.km L(meters) 1.511×1015.km 3.023×1015.km 6.046×1015.km
2.544×1040kg 5.089×1040kg 1.0179×1041kg M(kilograms) 2.035×1041kg 4.071×1041kg 8.143×1042kg
2.192×1031C 4.385×1031C 8.771×1031C C(Coulombs) 1.754×1032C 3.508×1032C 7.017×1032C
2.5772×1020 K 5.1544×1020 K 1.030×1021 K T(Kelvin) 2.061×1021 K 4.123×1021 K 8.247×1021 K
2.923×1048 5.846×1048 1.169×1049 B2Vertices 2.338×1049 4.6768×1049 9.353×1049
1.598×10147 1.278×10148 1.022×10149 ScalingV 8.1834×10150 2.497×10151 6.5467×10152
Discussion: The First Month: Use 30.436875 days per month based on a year of 365.2425 days divided by 12 months; Given there are 86,400 seconds per day, there are 2,629,746 seconds per month. It is within the notation 165. Multiplied by 299,792,458 m/s equals a length of 777,062,051,136,000 meters or 777,062,051,136 km, a little larger than the 165th notation.

There are 31,556,952,000 seconds to a millennium which is found between notations 177 and 178.

Key questions about order, relations and dynamics:

Vertex Counts for B2 and Scaling: From notations 139 to 200+ the actual number of vertices will be stored in its own page which can be accessed by clicking here.