**CENTER FOR PERFECTION STUDIES: CONTINUITY•SYMMETRY•HARMONY • GOALS** • November 2017 **Homepages**: Langlands I Langlands II|INFINITY|Inflation|KEYS|Original|REVIEW|Transformation

# Exascale, a quintillion calculations/second

**Simple logic**: To most-fully utilize and grasp the fullness of the *exascale* potential requires being contexted within the 202 base-2 notations that mathematically integrate “*everything-everywhere-for-all-time*” (a rather comprehensive-but-most-simple definition of the universe) whereby *everything-everywhere-for-all-time* is assumed to be an extension of any and every equation that captures or defines a bit of reality. Here space-and-time is assumed to be derivative, finite, and knowable. In this model light is assumed to define all space-and-time. Also, the known finite-infinite equations are necessarily included in the calculus. https://81018.com/chart

**Simple math**: Exascale calculations require the largest possible playground and these 202 notations defined by base-2 an exponentially-integrated scale of the the universe from the Planck Scale to the Age of the Universe is the largest and simplest.

**Complexity analysis**: Instead of trying to predict the future as a probability equation, we can begin to hypostatize our universe by observing-measuring-weighing the discontinuities and asymmetries that define the multi-level, multi-grid, multi-scale environments that define us. https://81018.com/hypostatic/

# The concept of a* singularity* is passé.

The concept of a singularity within science, particularly within computing sciences and within our standard models, is based on a limited view of the place of mathematics in defining (1) the infinitesimal (Notations 1-to-65) and (2) space-and-time and the unique definitions of light within each of the 202 notations.

**The non-singularity of so-called technological singularity**. The mathematics involved is substantial and complex and involves many time sequences. All the numbers, ratios, and equations that define what people call a

*technological singularity*are constantly jostling for position. Each seems to try to stand out in that crowd, “Look at what I do.” And so many also seem to be saying, “Don’t you know that it’s all about me.” Unless our algorithms and associated mathematics are within the largest possible contexts, our interpretations of the data are limited. Even within exascale computing, there is hardly a consideration of the implicit worldview! It is no wonder our world is a mess. If our words can easily shift from context to context, it becomes increasingly difficult to understand anything.

Who prioritizes the information that we do have? It seems like there is a natural accretion, a public consensus building within the most influential population groups. Unless our value systems are within the largest possible context, our interpretations of the data are necessarily biased. The so-called “technological singularity” is profoundly dependent the *initial singularity* that gives rise to all the *standard models*.

**This “Initial Singularity” Is a Meeting Place of Converging Formulae.**

**Keys to this Quiet Expansion**: More than the *big bang theory*‘s four forces of nature — gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force, and the weak force — *within this Planck scale* we *assume* these four are encapsulated within all four Planck base units and the constants that define them, and some manifestation of this unification is carried throughout all 202 notations. And, as we have noted, the Planck base units are defined by length, time, mass, 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 *ε*_{0 }or electric charge or electromagnetism), and the Boltzmann constant (or *k*_{B} or *of temperature)*.

As we attempt to go deeper into this analysis, we will be studying the mathematics of ratios and that virtually unexplored reality defined by the first 64 doublings. In light of these doublings, we will attempt to understand this domain more deeply by examining:

- The logic of exponential notation as given within the
*Chessboard and Wheat*story. - The statement, “If this chart is right, we live within an exponential universe.”
- The concepts of non-locality and entanglement.
- The progressive building of a mathematical logic that is incrementalism that defines Notation 2 to Notation 64. See https://81018.com/number
- The foundations for homogeneity and isotropy within this grid.
- And, then being wildly speculative, we’ll begin looking for consciousness and sleep, ethics and values, and qualities related to the perceptions through out senses. It may be true that all subjects that have never been on the grid may have a place somewhere along this part of the grid of our universe.

Let’s look alive, “There are unexplored domains waiting to be more fully discovered.”