Key Question: What happens within steps 1 to 65 within Big Board – little universe (BIBolu) and The Universe Table (UT)?

Background: This little document was prepared by Bruce Camber, a founder of Small Business School. This show aired weekly on PBS-TV stations around the USA and Canada for 14 years, and weekdays on the Voice of America-TV around the world. The focus was to capture the best of humanity, the power of human creativity and those with a vision to see beyond the horizon. Camber’s lifelong focus has been to answer the question, “What empowers our creativity?” As early as 1971 he researched within the common foundations between theology and physics by focusing on perfected states in space-time. Fast-forward, in December 2011 he opened a door on a very simple model of the universe dubbed the Big Board – little universe (BiBolu) using base-2 exponential notation and the platonic geometries. In 2012 a more simple version of that chart was introduced and it was dubbed The Universe Table. He is now shepherding National Science Fair activities based on this model and the two charts.

To participate, first complete this survey. Begin a tour of the charts (as well as take the survey) here.

The focus: Cellular Automaton and OSI Layers within computing systems. These two may be provide a good analogue for various degrees of perfection and the many faces of truth.

The power of metaphor and analogy: There are similar constructs and patterns that reoccur throughout the universe. Metaphors provide interior access to the geometries and numbers that are our universe. Intellectually, that construction is mimicked within computer programs. Perhaps the most analogously close place to begin is with Cellular Automaton and the OSI Layers (Open Systems Interconnection).

Cellular Automaton: Though various mechanical automaton were developed in ancient times, cellular automaton originate with the work of Stanislaw Ulam and John von Neumann. Here are the footings for machine that self-replicate. In 1970 John Conway extended that work by simplifying their rule set, then created the Game of Life which opened the study beyond those with computational mathematics. With the work of Stephen Wolfram, the study of cellular automaton has become a rich, promising discipline unto itself. Here the commonsense understand of a rule takes on much deeper, albeit simple, mathematical definition. Part of our analysis will be to attempt to understand these formulations of key rules, i.e. Rule 30 for aperiodic or chaotic behavior, Rule 90, Rule 110 for the balancing between chaos and stabilitiy, and Rule 184.

OSI, a reference model developed, published and promoted by International Organization for Standardizations (ISO), provides a framework for programming the backbone of the World Wide Web (WWW) utilizing what is known in the computer industry as open systems protocols whereby order, relations, and dynamics are defined within inherently-related systems, set theory and group theory. All complex systems are derivative of simple systems, rules and axioms.

There are seven official layers. Informally, there are three additional layers. We will focus on the first seven, then include the others.

In the process of entering an analogy or metaphor, it becomes obvious one must “force fit” the words and expressions. Essentially one suspends judgment to allow the new information that does not seem to cohere a real chance to breath. Using the OSI layers as a metaphor or direct analogy for each notation will require the same methodology. The official seven layers, and the other emergent layers, are initially forced to be analogous to the layers of truth and its Janus-face, degrees of perfection. The result is that now we have layers and degrees of truth and perfection. Perfect is not just perfect but can always be better. It’s corollary works as well: Truth is not just truth but can always be even more true.

The OSI Layers are as follows:

Layer 1: OSI Physical Layer for basic order that creates a continuity condition
Layer 2: OSI Data link Layer for basic relations that creates a basic symmetry
Layer 3: OSI Network Layer for basic dynamics that creates an initial harmony

That is one complete circle within the notation, then it makes a more integrative circle within a set.

Layer 4: OSI Transport Layer for secondary order/continuity
Layer 5: OSI Session Layer for secondary relations/symmetries
Layer 6: OSI Presentation Layer for secondary dynamics and harmony

That is the next revolution of integrative activity, then it makes it third circle for more sets and for groups.

Layer 7: OSI Application Layer for tertiary order/continuity

The following layers are informal, and not part of the OSI-ISO schema, but have evolved from within the user groups and on the web:
Layer 8: OSI Individuation Layer, also referred to as the economic or the finance layer, for tertiary relations/symmetries
Layer 9: OSI Organization Layer, also referred to as the political layer for tertiary dynamics/harmonies.

Of course, many will observe that there is very little truth or perfection in economics, finance, or politics and at most levels, they would be correct. Yet, observe really-real agreements within each, there is a moment of truth. There is a sense of real perfection even if it is momentary and fleeting.

Layer 10: OSI Government and Legal compliance Layer, also referred to as the political layer for the next layer of order/continuity.

Again, most would readily observe that the complex nature of governmental and legal systems, there can be no truth or perfection, yet instances throughout history could readily be cited.

Layers 11 and beyond also need to be defined in light of the arts, including the religious and healing arts. That will be done as soon as it can be deemed.

Reference model: The OSI layers include lists of functions and services that make each layer cohere. There are also axioms, corollaries, and rules (See: Cellular Automaton and theory) for the inter-relation of each layer with the layers directly above and below it. And, as a result, the OSI model continues to make contributions to the development of other products, protocols, and services for many other types of networks.

The first time this page was publicly made accessible was Martin Luther King Day, January 20, 2014 from the homepage of Small Business School. Increasingly now there will be seamless links between this site and Small Business School..

Consent & Disclaimer: Guidelines

From the Planck Length to the Observable UniverseUniverse Table

Thank you for taking time with the Big Board-little universe and the Universe Table. We would like to ask you five quick and easy questions, but first, you should know the following:  (1) You will remain anonymous to us in this project.  (2) You are free to decide not to answer any question or stop the survey at any time. (3) There is no personal identifiers used in this survey.  We do ask you to use an impersonal identifier to help us match up this survey with any future survey that you take here.

Your participation will help us with our research.

This is a very simple survey. Nevertheless, there is always a possibility of tampering from an outside source when using the internet for collecting information. While the confidentiality of your responses will be protected once the data is downloaded from the internet, there is always a possibility of some kind of hacking or other security breaches that could somehow unearth the confidentiality of your responses. Green Arrow

By clicking here you will go to the survey and you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these guidelines and consent.
Pink Arrow

Big Board – little universe

Email: Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking, February 2014

DATE:   Friday, Feb 7, 2014
TO:     Prof. Dr. Stephen Hawking, Cambridge University, England
FM:      Bruce Camber

My dear Prof. Dr. Hawking,

I would like to talk with you about base-2 exponential notation from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe.  First, however, you may be pleased to learn that we are exploring the possibilities of creating a Space Elevator to be located at the 30N/90W in East New Orleans.

We will also be recreating Thomas Edison’s first-in-the-world (1895) commercial movie theater on Canal Street about where it was located downtown. The 30/90 is about five miles away.  The theater will be a non-stop, 24/7, film extravaganza where science fiction meets science fact, and from where people will depart to go to the Base Station to board the Space Elevator to go up to one of many the International Research Space Stations (IRCC).  Once on the lift (Space Elevator) they will have had quite a ride, even experienced weightlessness for a short time.  There will be several layers of participation… even overnight guests!  Once on the IRCC they will be able to endlessly watch as they orbit the earth and use telescopes to search for inhabitable planets and plan for their space walks and more.

Of course, we are reviewing all things related to space-and-time, Sir Arthur’s quest for an elevator, and Sagan’s insights regarding the ETs of the universe.  So, your work with Sir Arthur and Carl Sagan, now many years ago, is priceless.

UTThis ride into space will be profoundly educational. These very special simulated environments will have non-stop educational moments. NASA and the National Science Foundation will be guiding much of its development.

However, I am pushing to introduce base-2 exponential notation from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe where the entire universe is seen within the 202.34 notations (layers, doubling, or steps – NASA’s calculation for us) to about 205.11 (JP Luminet’s calculations for us).  Those calculations provides an ordered set within a very granular environment, but so much more.  The first 65 notations are being filled using cellular automaton.  We are attempting to engage Stephen Wolfram (inventor of Mathematica)  to help guide us given Benoit Mandelbrot is no longer available. At notation 65 the fermions and protons begin to emerge.

Why has the academic community ignored the simple expansion of the Planck Length using base-2?

I was a personal friend of Phil and Phylis Morrison when Powers of Ten came out.  That took a high school teacher (Kees Boeke) to lead the way.  It seems to me that even Max Planck could have stopped long enough to make some modest speculations about a base-2 progression back in 1901.  We need to pull in Alfred North Whitehead’s point-free geometries and I think we may have the basis to create a new scientific platform whereby space increasingly becomes derivative of geometry and time derivative of number.  Perhaps someday we can go into the Einstein-Rosen tunnel and begin to calculate when-where-and-how to exit!  Well, maybe.  That’s where we need your advice down the road.

So, after all this verbosity, my question is simple, “Why not use base-2 notation from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe as a simple ordering tool?”  Thanks.



Email: Stephen Wolfram, creator of Mathematica


Big Board - little universe

Big Board – little universe

Date:   Sat, 4 Jan 2014
To:       Stephen Wolfram
From:   Bruce Camber

Subject:   Cellular automaton

1. UCSD Institute of Neural Computation, 2003 H. Paul Rockwood Memorial lecture
Recorded: 4/30/2003     Duration: 42 minutes 42 seconds

Key questions:
1. How does structure take shape in the universe?
2. What are the fundamental problems in taking the approach of cellular automata?
3. What does it mean to be a universal system?
4. What gives Rule 30 and 110 their special status?
5. What is computational equivalence?

Dear Stephen:

Thank you for your 2003 H. Paul Rockwood Memorial lecture on cellular automata. I just finished watching the YouTube version of it and I have learned substantially and I have been challenged. It was all quite brilliant.

In light of your work, I need to examine further several simple facts:

1. The universe is mathematically very small. Using base-2 exponential notation from the Planck Length to the Observable Universe, there are just 202.34 (NASA, Kolecki) to 205.11 (Paris, Luminet) notations, steps or doublings. This work (the mathematics) actually began in a high school geometry class when we started with a tetrahedron and divided the edges by 2 finding the octahedron in the middle and four tetrahedrons in each corner. Then dividing the octahedron we found the eight tetrahedrons in each face and the six octahedron in each corner. We kept going within until we found the Planck Length. It was easy to decide to multiply by 2 out to the Observable Universe. Then it was easy to standardize the measurements we just multiplied the Planck Length by 2 until we were in the range of the Observable Universe.

2. The small scale universe is an amazingly complex place. We had to assume the Planck Length is a singularity of one vertex and then we followed the expansion of vertices along each notation. By the 60th notation, of course, there are over a quintillion vertices and at 61st notation another 3 quintillion vertices are added. Yet, it all must start most simply and here the principles of computational equivalence has its a great possible impact. We are right now researching to see how and if AN Whitehead’s point-free geometries could also have applicability.

3. This little universe is readily tiled by the simplest structures.
The universe can be simply and readily tiled with the four hexagonal plates within the octahedron and by the tetrahedral-octahedral-tetrahedral chains.

4. Yet, the universe is delightfully imperfect. In 1959, Frank/Kaspers discerned the 7.38 degree gap with a simple construction of five tetrahedrons looking a lot like the Chrysler logo. The icosahedron can be constructed with two facing pentastars and a band of ten tetrahedrons between them. When made up of 20 tetrahedrons, the icosahedron is more than irregular, it is quite squishy. We call it quantum geometry in our high school. It is the opening to, or the beginning of, randomness.

5. The Planck Length as the next big thing. The behavior may not be so complicated on the surface, but far more complicated just below it. Computers generate rules and these simple rules might be what nature is using below the thresholds of measuring devices.

I could go on, but let’s see if these statements are at all helpful. Our work is just two years old yet relies on several assumptions that have been rattling around for 40 years. I’ll insert from references below.

Many thanks again for your cellular automaton lecture.


Bruce Camber

First principles:
Earlier edition:
One of our student’s is doing a science fair project related to it all: