The email I sent to Petr Horava about CDT, LQG and his new theory. (no answer).

[MTd2]

I guess I will post not answered emails so that I can improve my ideas, or perhaps, seek better ideas to whom send a similar message.

*********

Dear Petr Horava,

In your article you say that your result reproduces the lattice computations of

J. Ambjørn, J. Jurkiewicz, and R. Loll, Spectral Dimension of the Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95
(2005) 171301, [hep-th/0505113].

but I'd like to know if you are aware that these computations that reproduces this result were already reproduced by:
Leonardo Modesto, "Fractal Structure of Loop Quantum Gravity", http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.2214
Which tries to find a link between LQG, CDT and assymptotic safety. Check page. 3, section "4d space time", equations 22 and 23 and the plot on figure 4, page.4. This is based on the results of one of the collaborator of Renate Loll research group:
Dario Benedetti, "Fractal properties of quantum spacetime", http://arxiv.org/abs/0811.1396

Given the similar claims and that the fits to the lattice computatons of the spectral dimension are also very recent, I thought your paper would have some comments concening the above articles.

Just a random question. A few years ago, I saw some sugestions from Ashok Sen and Sergei Gukov that LQG could be a low limit energy of a M-Theory. I am aware of the negative probability states that plague LQG and also the problem with identifying the Plebanski actions with the lagragians that are used in LQG. But given the converging results in these plots, do you think that by imposing some restrictions on LQG, one can obtain LQG as a limit of m theory.

Eyo Eyo Ita is a guy that works with anisyotropic space time as a restriction to LQG like theories. This Ita's articles:

http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+ita+AND+eyo+eyo/0/1/0/all/0/1

I guess most of his recent articles are relevant to the discussions, even since he tries to fix the negative Kodama states by an anisyotropic space restriction.

Cheers,

Daniel.

 

[atyy]

Eyo Ita and Eyo Eyo Ita III are the same person?

 

[MTd2]

Well, yes...

 

[redargon]

I have no clue about the content of the letter, but there are some things that are written that make me cringe and these are purely letter writing techniques.

Do you know Petr Horava well? Probably not, or you would just say hi Petr or dear Petr, but why do you end your letter with "cheers"? To be taken seriously, I think you should try to be slightly more formal. Just because it is an email, doesn't make it casual. If the recipient replies in a casual way, then sure, by all means have a chat. Even "kind regards" would be better, but "yours sincerely" would be best and if you have addressed someone by their full name, then you should use your full name in the signature too.

also referring to Eyo Ita as a guy that does something, is inappropriate. "This guy, Einstein, did this stuff, like with relativity and what have you." It sounds like something from dude where's my car. Use guy for applications like: Hey guys let's go grab a beer. Rather just say "Eyo Ita works with anisyotropic..."

"Just a random question" does not need to be added to the paragraph. It makes the question sound unimportant and may be disregarded by the recipient of your letter.

I know your mother language is probably not english, and there is nothing wrong with that, but I'm just trying to provide some letter writing tips that may improve the chances of you being taken more seriously (as I'm sure it is serious for you to know the answers) and getting replies to your emails in the future.

Hope that helps

 

[MTd2]

Oh, I see. Hmm. Petr Horava is really an important guy. One of the top guys of String Theory, like Edward Witten, Ashok Sen, Juan Maldacena, Leonard Susskind and Cumrun Vafa. But I see your point. Well, I have another email account with .gov because I am a civil servant.

 

[cristo]

Do you know Petr Horava well? Probably not, or you would just say hi Petr or dear Petr, but why do you end your letter with "cheers"? To be taken seriously, I think you should try to be slightly more formal.

I absolutely agree. Unless you know someone well, or have corresponded with them before and "Hi xxx" emails in response, then you should always use titles as if you were writing a letter. In an email to a random academic, you should always use Dr/Professor as the title. You need to be more formal and respectful, otherwise you won't be likely to receive a reply.