On following the work of Shamit Kachru

Shamit Kachru, Director, Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics (Wikipedia)
Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-4060

ArXiv (155) Elementary introduction to Moonshine, 2016
Flux Modularity, F-Theory, and Rational Models, 2020
Homepage(s): Bio, Google Scholar, inSPIREHEP, Packard Fdtn., Wikipedia, World Science Festival

Second email: 27 April 2022 @ 4:09 PM (small edits)

Dear Prof. Dr. Shamit Kachru:

Back on February 13, I sent you an email regarding your most pivotal intellectual transitions. Refocusing your scholarly insights may be the best thing you can do to understand a string more profoundly. Though barely a teacher of high school kids, I have studied with a few of the greats like Bohm (more), Conway (Princeton), J.P. Vigier, Dyson (IAS), and Weisskopf.

The scholarly community has been wandering for over 100 years. What most-basic assumptions are off? Have we failed to grasp our first principles? I think so and here is my simple attempt to forge a new path: https://81018.com/ Of course, your comments would be most helpful.



PS. My own reference page to you and your work here: https://81018.com/kachru/ -BEC

First email: Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 3:04 PM 

Dear Prof. Dr. Shamit Kachru:

We met ever so briefly on one of my quick visits to Stanford. Meetings, lectures, tours… too old for it all now.

I was looking at your list of postdocs and know the work of a few. Certainly, you can be satisfied that you taught them well.

Witten, Seiburg, Veneziano, Duff, Polchinski… and that list goes on and on and on. Who could blame you for jumping ship before it’s too late? Life is short.

Has string theory fully embraced a simple definition of infinity? Take, for example, from the infinite facets of pi, infinity is continuity, symmetry and harmony: https://81018.com/almost/#CSH

Has string theory embraced a base-2 exponential notation from the Planck scale to this day? Logically base-2 appears to encapsulate everything, everywhere for all time within just 202 notations. The first 64 notations are well-below all possible measurements. It is a place for Langlands programs to begin and string and M-theory to take over. 

Has string theory asked about the geometries of imperfection given within Aristotle’s 1800 year old mistake? It keeps getting lifted back up, yet nobody has truly engaged its functionality within quantum indeterminacy in light of quantum field theory and condensed matter physics.

Is that low-hanging fruit waiting to be harvested? You have the gravitas to harvest and to get us thinking more clearly and deeply.

Thank you.

Warm regards,